Red Letter Media

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

Favorite recurring character? (Select 4)

  • Jack / AIDSMobdy

    Votes: 223 23.6%
  • Josh / the Wizard

    Votes: 65 6.9%
  • Colin (Canadian #1)

    Votes: 414 43.9%
  • Jim (Canadian #2)

    Votes: 200 21.2%
  • Tim

    Votes: 352 37.3%
  • Len Kabasinski

    Votes: 190 20.1%
  • Freddie Williams

    Votes: 244 25.9%
  • Patton Oswalt

    Votes: 21 2.2%
  • Macaulay Culkin

    Votes: 472 50.1%
  • Max Landis

    Votes: 52 5.5%

  • Total voters
    943
I don't think it's that hard to figure out — the people most excited about it are the people with zero developed skills, because they can't make anything without it and they don't see all the shit that sucks about it. The more you know about any particular art form the less AI slop appeals to you. The ignorant are dazzled more easily.
Making AI videos is really difficult. It's like saying using CGI is easier than practical effects. Both require completely different sets of skills. I tried learning to use an UI to generate AI work (just out of intellectual curiosity) and it's basically like learning to code or learning to play an instrument or a foreign language. It's not as simple as writing a prompt and waiting for the computer to miraculously implement your vision.

Knowing a lot about art doesn't mean you should be opposed to new technologies. I know some talented people who do very creative things with AI. It's a shame that every time someone put something AI related online, half the comments are people being outraged that they have the audacity to incorporate AI in their work.

I also don't understand why people are opposed to the fact that it is slowly becoming easier to create an artwork. You can still decide if the work is good or bad. It's like everything else. People publish bad books, make bad paintings, awful music, terrible sculptures. The fact that there is slop doesn't mean it can only be slop. There is some very interesting and beautiful art that is being made with AI, you are just not seeking it, which is fine, but it exists.
 
I'm not even sure if we can reverse it, not on the current internet.
i'd say you can reverse it you just need to be better about picking your libraries. the same way you wouldn't train an AI on BET all day if you wanted it to be good at making country songs, except most AI now is general based. to do a retarded example, we're in the "general store" era. like in the wild west, they try to have anything people will need but most of it is barely good enough and you take it because that's what you can get.

but later on came the speciality store era, you needed electronics you knew to go to Fry's, you needed a book you knew to go to Barnes and Noble, you needed music you knew the exact record store to find it in, you needed a video game you knew to go to Funcoland.

Once things settle down, and especially once smaller actors realize this, you'll have AI trained exactly on IRL videos so it won't mix this shit up.

Its why AI was able to recreate Pixar so well super early, everyone knows what pixar is, but also i'd bet my life that everything labeled fucking Pixar was Pixar instead of something wildly off so the AI knew exactly what it needed to output. AI specialization will get us there in a few years.
In practice yes because you can already just generate something "in the style of X"
thats what i was asking, instead of asking for ai to give me "a song in the style of Lady Gaga" can i ask it to "give me a legally distinct version of just dance by lady gaga"
I also don't understand why people are opposed to the fact that it is slowly becoming easier to create an artwork. You can still decide if the work is good or bad. It's like everything else. People publish bad books, make bad paintings, awful music, terrible sculptures.
this happens all the time, the film industry was super pissed about the rise of television, and people being able to sell mix tapes on the street pissed off the music industry. Garage Band on apple computers pissed off tons of music industry people, but then enough years passed where it became the norm.

The 1980s and especially 1990s had huge debates about rap music and EDM because they were based on samples and people said it "wasn't real art" because of it.

the same shit people are saying now, they would have said about Fatboy Slim's output 30 years ago or Run DMC's 40 years ago
 
AI is a dead end, there's really nothing more to say about it than that. It's funny seeing all the slop trailers being taken at face value by retards, but it's the lowest form of entertainment. The only effect it'll end up having is that the advertising industry will become sloppier than ever. There's no way that's going away.
 
Making AI videos is really difficult. It's like saying using CGI is easier than practical effects. Both require completely different sets of skills. I tried learning to use an UI to generate AI work (just out of intellectual curiosity) and it's basically like learning to code or learning to play an instrument or a foreign language. It's not as simple as writing a prompt and waiting for the computer to miraculously implement your vision.

Yes, effective prompting of AI is a skill. I think those AI trailers that take a movie and show what they would look like if they came out in the 50s to be really cool and interesting uses of AI. I suspect the high quality version are hard to do, even using AI.

I also think some of the corridor videos where they use AI stuff like deepfake to improve older movie CGI, or to do an effect it took teams to do previously also shows how AI can empower small-time creative teams. I don't think its as simple as using AI = bad.

Like all technology is can be used to create shit. Its disappointing they haven't tried to learn more about AI.
 
Just happened to be reading the thread when I got the notification for this.

A few neat smaller props and then a nude man which I’m sure will come in handy to have about.
 

Attachments

  • bink.webp
    bink.webp
    252.5 KB · Views: 36
  • sly.webp
    sly.webp
    172.4 KB · Views: 35
thats what i was asking, instead of asking for ai to give me "a song in the style of Lady Gaga" can i ask it to "give me a legally distinct version of just dance by lady gaga"
Legally, it is hard to answer for certain because we don't have court cases that have made that determination so it's a guess based on what we think is "substantially different".

Technically, there isn't a single AI tool that can do that or I don't know of it. However, you can do this by combining several AI tools.
  1. First, you need to get rid of the lyrics because copying lyrics is likely to put you on the spot. You can use Lalal.ai to remove lyrics or you can find an instrumental version of the song on YouTube and download that.
  2. Secondly, you can use a website like AIVA.ai to upload your track (i.e.., your instrumental) and ask them to remix it automatically using their AI tool (disclaimer, I haven't tried it). You won't be able to upload an MP3 file to that site though, you need to upload a MIDI file (which is basically a music sheet for your computer to read).
  3. You can use a website like Klangio to convert MP3 files to MIDI - they provide a tutorial on their website:
    . It's fairly complicated but wouldn't take you more than a weekend to figure out.
  4. Once you have your MIDI file, you can use AIVA.ai to make an alternative version. Whether the result would infringe the copyright right of the original author depends on how different that result is from the original.
In short, there isn't a single solution at the moment to do what I described but you can do it yourself by combining several AI tools. This could be useful for streamers who don't want to get constant strikes for playing copyrighted material on their streams. It still requires some work and some skills.

Alternative 1: you can ask Chat GPT to generate a MIDI track in the style of Lady Gaga "Alejandro" - Chat GPT does understand "legally distinct". You simply ask Chat GPT to: "Create an original Lady Gaga–inspired MIDI" but you still need a local machine (mixing software) to read the MIDI and then follow the applicable steps above.

Alternative 2: you can use onlinesequencer.net
Here is an copyright free version of Radio / Video by System of a Down which is publicly available on their website ( ). This website does not generate AI song, rather it is a library of songs created by users which are in the style of popular songs. I assume, most of them would avoid copyright infringment but not 100% certain it would pass the legal test. It's pretty cool though. You can also edit the songs directly on the website!

I think those AI trailers that take a movie and show what they would look like if they came out in the 50s to be really cool and interesting uses of AI. I suspect the high quality version are hard to do, even using AI.
Haha I love those!
The Phantom Menace

They have gotten more creative lately - Lord of the Stars (Panavision style trailer combining Star Wars and LotR):

thats what i was asking, instead of asking for ai to give me "a song in the style of Lady Gaga" can i ask it to "give me a legally distinct version of just dance by lady gaga"
Here is the result using steps 1 to 4 in my last response: Lady Gaga - Just Dance remixed using AIVA ai (it took me about 30 minutes and no prior knowledge). Obviously it's not amazing but I'm not a DJ.
I downloaded the MIDI directly from a MIDI library for free (here: ) and then uploaded it in AVAI ai and clicked around a bit (you need to download the desktop version of AVAI but it's also free).
I'm sure if you take the time to figure out how the software actually works you can do much better than that
 

Attachments

They missed an easy opportunity with this new AI video. They discuss if all those fake movie trailers were made by just typing in the prompt or if they piece the trailers together via multiple scenes generated via AI prompts. They could have done as a gimmick making AI generated versions of their shows. One version of HITB was made via "Make an AI episode of Half in the Bag 5 minutes long" while another would be made via the prompts "Mike and Jay talk about The Batman" and " Mike, Jay, and Rich talk about the new Mission Impossible". If anything it could have been a goofy one-off gimmick to just say "we tried this out for fun" let us know how accurate it was.
 
I hate the uncanniness of AI video. As fast as it's developing there's always that inhuman factor that creeps me out. I'm always expecting to see faces and limbs transmorphing into something else like they're made out of water.
Speaking of uncanny, I was hoping they would edit this one in with the flood of AI videos considering how they've played the original so many times before:

I think this shit is inevitable, even if it's often inhuman and creepy (case in point). Whenever there is technology that lowers the cost of production it's always widely adopted.
RIP Baby Lynch, you would have hated this shit.

Just happened to be reading the thread when I got the notification for this.

A few neat smaller props and then a nude man which I’m sure will come in handy to have about.
Once again those starving niglets in Africa go hungry, and all because they wanted a naked Stallone. But in all seriousness, that Critter is beautiful looking. The creator of it is apparently in the comments too.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of uncanny, I was hoping they would edit this one in with the flood of AI videos considering how they've played the original so many times before:
View attachment 7438027
I think this shit is inevitable, even if it's often inhuman and creepy (case in point). Whenever there is technology that lowers the cost of production it's always widely adopted.
RIP Baby Lynch, you would have hated this shit.


Once again those starving niglets in Africa go hungry, and all because they wanted a naked Stallone. But in all seriousness, that Critter is beautiful looking. The creator of it is apparently in the comments too.

@pauljsalamoff
1 day ago (edited)
Wow!!! That's one of the CRITTERS from CRITTERS 3 & 4 that I helped build for The Chiodo Bros. I was also one of the lead puppeteers on both films! That puppet has co-starred with Leonardo DiCaprio, Angela Bassett, Brad Dourif ... and now you guys!!! I bet the inside still smells of my hand sweat! Enjoy
🙂

@roberth1111
1 day ago
Critters 1 scared me as a kid
@ShoRyuBarbie
1 day ago
That's really cool, but in the video they say it's from Critters 2. Did they get scammed, or is it just their stage 15 dementia?
@pauljsalamoff
1 day ago
@ShoRyuBarbie That is absolutely from CRITTERS 3 & 4. The ones from Critters 2 looked a little different
@roberth1111
1 day ago
Dementia @ShoRyuBarbie
@ZachariahScott
1 day ago
thats gross man, artists and craftsmen rule, dont ever stop sweating!
@DaddyBiscuits
1 day ago
Some day, they will recreate puppeteers from the DNA they find inside such things
@skizmo13
1 day ago
And now it'll have shared screen time with THE Rich Evans!
@Cosper79
1 day ago
"Cheeseburgers no bones" is a core childhood memory.
@shadwhawk178
1 day ago
@pauljsalamoff The Propstore auction listing says it's from Critters 2, so they were going off that.
@Willothemask
1 day ago
That's so awesome! That's the wonder of RLM comment sections, the people who were there and actually involved always end up showing up.Any fun tales from puppeteering those Critters?
@thatguyfromthatthing3006
1 day ago
Excellent work my man. 3 and 4 were a bit lacking in the script and acting departments, but the puppetry made those films so much fun to watch. You are one of the unsung heroes of my childhood and I salute you lmao
@pauljsalamoff
1 day ago
@Willothemask Lots of fun stories! I wish I could post some pix on this thread as I have plenty behind the scenes pix from both movies
@floydlooney6837
1 day ago
It is a great prop
@TheThirdPrice
14 hours ago
@pauljsalamoff you should make a post on the rlm subreddit!
@YoungGodOG
3 hours ago
Wow
 
Speaking of uncanny, I was hoping they would edit this one in with the flood of AI videos considering how they've played the original so many times before:
View attachment 7438027
I think this shit is inevitable, even if it's often inhuman and creepy (case in point). Whenever there is technology that lowers the cost of production it's always widely adopted.
RIP Baby Lynch, you would have hated this shit.


Once again those starving niglets in Africa go hungry, and all because they wanted a naked Stallone. But in all seriousness, that Critter is beautiful looking. The creator of it is apparently in the comments too.
I swear to God, their entire legacy in my brain is going to be, "Jesus, they could have fed a lot of starving kids in Africa with all the money they waste on stupid shit" and I don't think anything they could ever do will ever overshadow that one monumentally hypocritical fuckup for me. I wonder how alone I am in that.
 
Back