Academy bars AI-generated actors and screenplays from Oscar eligibility in new rules

AI-generated actors and scripts are now ineligible for Oscars | TechCrunch

The organization behind the Academy Awards released new Oscar rules on Friday, including several that address the use of generative artificial intelligence. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences said that only performances "credited in the film's legal billing and demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" will be eligible for Academy Awards. Similarly, the academy said that screenplays must be "human-authored" to be eligible. The academy also said it has the right to request more information about a film's AI usage and "human authorship." These rule changes come as an independent film is in the works with an AI-generated version of Val Kilmer, as AI "actress" Tilly Norwood keeps making headlines, and as new video models are causing at least a few filmmakers to make sweeping declarations of despair. AI was also one of the main sticking points in the actors' and writers' strikes back in 2023. Outside Hollywood, at least one novel has been pulled by its publisher due to the apparent use of AI, and other writers' groups are declaring that AI usage makes work ineligible for awards.

And the Oscar Does Not Go to... AI 'Actors' and AI-Written Screenplays, the Academy Says

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences -- the organization behind the Oscars -- is trying to avoid giving awards to AI. An updated list of rules for the 99th Academy Awards, released on Friday, includes many that are aimed at ensuring that a human meaningfully contributed to the creation of the movie to be eligible for its awards. The new rules state that "only roles credited in the film's legal billing and demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" are eligible for awards. This is an issue that popped up recently with the announcement that actor Val Kilmer's estate signed off on director Coerte Voorhees using generative AI to include an AI version of Kilmer in his new movie, As Deep As The Grave. Kilmer was involved with the initial stages of the movie's production before his death in 2025. AI-edited or written screenplays won't be eligible either, with the rules saying they "must be human-authored" to be eligible for recognition. And if the Academy has questions about a movie's human authorship, it says it reserves the right to request more information. The Academy and Writers Guild Association-West didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the new anti-AI rules. A representative for the actors union SAG-AFTRA declined to comment, but the organization has similar rules for its own Actor Awards to prioritize humans in moviemaking. These changes are especially important as AI tools continue to infiltrate Hollywood, from script creation to special effects and even new, entirely AI-created actors like Tilly Norwood. Unions representing actors, writers and directors have been fighting studios for years over AI protections. It was one of the biggest demands during the Hollywood strikes in the summer of 2023. Some of the biggest concerns are around protecting their work and likenesses from unauthorized and unpaid AI projects, along with worries about job loss and AI's effect on human creativity. There are several non-AI changes, including that an actor may be nominated for the same award for multiple performances if each nabs a spot in the top five ranking. So Zendaya could be nominated for best actress for her role in Dune: Part Three and for her upcoming role in Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey. The award for best international film will now be awarded to the film's director, rather than the country or region they hail from, and will include their name on the plaque.

You Need to Be Human to Win an Oscar, Says Academy

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has spoken: you need to be human to win an Oscar. In upcoming years' acting categories, only roles that are "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent will be considered eligible," according to Vanity Fair. Meanwhile, in the screenplay categories, "the rules codify that screenplays must be human-authored to be eligible." In addition, the Academy, which adapts its rules every year, retained the right to request additional information about how AI was used and the extent of human authorship in any project that uses generative AI. To be clear, this doesn't mean that AI-infused movies can't win Oscars; the rules seem to allow AI to be used in some areas, like visual effects, for example. This isn't necessarily a case of the Academy being extraordinarily forward-looking. We're starting to see big-name, award-winning actors already being recreated by AI on screen. The late Top Gun actor Val Kilmer is soon set to appear in the upcoming historical action-adventure film As Deep as the Grave, with AI being used to recreate the actor, who had been cast in the movie before his death. In addition, we've seen plenty of other high-profile AI resurrections of award-winning actors. In 2024, the late Ian Holm, known for The Lord of the Rings, appeared in digital form in Alien: Romulus four years after his death, a move some critics dubbed "digital necromancy." Holm was nominated for an Academy Award for one of his real-life performances, in 1981's sports drama Chariots of Fire. Though we haven't seen any openly AI-generated screenplays feature in mainstream Hollywood fare, plenty of independent movies have appeared that used entirely AI-made scripts. 2016's Sunspring featured an entirely AI-generated screenplay performed by human actors. Though it didn't make it to the Oscars, it received positive feedback from critics and racked up over a million views on YouTube after premiering at the London Sci-Fi Film Festival. A follow-up short film written by the same AI bot, 2017's It's No Game, featured Baywatch actor David Hasselhoff.

AI actors and writers will be ineligible for Oscars

LOS ANGELES, May 1 (Reuters) - Academy Awards organizers issued new rules on Friday to clarify that acting and writing must be performed by humans and not artificial intelligence to be eligible for the movie industry's highest honors. The changes from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences ⁠apply to submissions for the next Oscars ceremony, scheduled for March 2027. Generative AI has raised alarm in the movie and TV business as workers fear studios will use the technology to replace human workers to lower costs. The debut last year of an AI-generated "actress" dubbed Tilly Norwood, ⁠and its producer's boasts of interest from studio executives, added to concerns and sparked a backlash from the SAG-AFTRA actors union. Under the Academy's new ⁠rules, filmmakers can use AI tools but a "synthetic" actor such as Norwood would be ineligible for an ⁠Oscar, the group said in a statement. It said screenplays must be "human-authored" to be ⁠considered. The rules state the Academy can request additional information to verify submissions were created by humans. Reporting by Lisa Richwine Editing by Rod Nickel Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

AI performances and screenplays won't be eligible for Oscars - Engadget

Sorry, Val Kilmer fans, but the late actor's Oscar ship has officially sailed. On Friday, Reuters reported that AI-generated acting and writing won't be eligible for Academy Awards. The new rules from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences will take effect beginning with next year's presentation, scheduled for March 2027. The Academy's updated rules state that while filmmakers can use AI tools, "synthetic" performers can't win any awards. Ditto for AI-written screenplays, which must be "human-authored." The Academy can request more information from submissions to confirm that they were created by humans. A "performance" that won't need further clarification is Kilmer's fully AI-generated appearance in the upcoming indie film, As Deep as the Grave. The actor was initially cast in the movie but had to back out due to medical concerns. (He died in April 2025.) Although Kilmer never stepped foot on set, he will appear in "a significant part" of the movie, according to Variety. "His family kept saying how important they thought the movie was and that Val really wanted to be a part of this," said Coerte Voorhees, the film's writer and director. "He really thought it was [an] important story that he wanted his name on. It was that support that gave me the confidence to say, okay let's do this. Despite the fact some people might call it controversial, this is what Val wanted." Perhaps even more jarring than the AI-generated likeness of a dead actor is the work of a ByteDance tool that has also raised some alarm in the industry. A two-sentence prompt using Seedance 2.0 was all it took to generate a highly convincing 15-second clip of Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt duking it out on a rooftop. (C'mon, Pitt would totally kick his ass.) The cinematic clip went viral, Hollywood experienced existential panic, and Washington even weighed in. The latest? ByteDance reportedly paused the tool's rollout while the entertainment industry braces for a future where typing a few words could be all it takes to churn out a feature film.

The Oscars just ruled that AI actors and AI-written scripts can't win awards

Serving tech enthusiasts for over 25 years. TechSpot means tech analysis and advice you can trust. A hot potato: With generative AI becoming more prevalent in society, are we heading toward a future where an AI-created actor or script wins an Oscar? If it does ever happen, it certainly won't be anytime soon: the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has just banned their eligibility for awards. The Academy clarified rules for two categories related to AI, writes Vanity Fair. The first states that the only acting roles eligible for Oscar nominations are those "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent." Screenplays, meanwhile, must be human-authored to be eligible. While this all sounds like something we'll have to deal with in the future, it's happening now. It was reported in March that the late Top Gun actor Val Kilmer was being digitally resurrected in AI-generated form to star in a movie called As Deep as the Grave. He originally signed on in 2020 but was unable to film any scenes due to his battle with throat cancer. We've also seen actors brought back to life digitally to reprise old roles, including Ian Holm in Alien: Romulus four years after his death, and Peter Cushing in 2016's Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, which led to a lawsuit against Disney that was dismissed in December. Then there's Tilly Norwood, the AI-generated "actor" unveiled last year to plenty of anger from SAG-AFTRA. The Dutch production company behind Norwood argued that audiences are more invested in a film's story than in its actors, and therefore, performers could easily be AI-generated. As for scripts, there was Sunspring, starring Silicon Valley's Thomas Middleditch and directed by Oscar Sharp back in 2016. Its AI-generated script received praise at the time, though the film is now ten years old and the technology has moved on considerably. The same AI bot wrote a follow-up called It's No Game, starring David Hasselhoff, a year later. The clarification doesn't mean any movie that uses generative AI is automatically out of the running. The Academy's new language allows the organization to ask for more information about how AI was used and where human authorship begins and ends. It means that AI-assisted visual effects, voice tools, de-aging, or other production tech should not by themselves make a film ineligible, assuming the nominated acting or writing work still comes from humans. Hollywood's 2023 strikes put AI protections at the center of contract talks, and studios are now experimenting with tools that can clone voices, generate faces, and polish scripts. It seems the Academy is drawing its line before more concerns arise.

Oscars bans AI actors, writing from awards

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has clarified that only acting and writing for films done by humans will be considered eligible to win an Oscar. The academy, which controls the US film industry's most prestigious award, on Friday issued updated rules for what kind of work in movies and documentaries would be considered eligible for an Oscar as the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technology grows. In updated eligibility requirements, the Academy specified that only acting "demonstrably performed by humans" and that writing "must be human-authored" in order to be nominated for an award. The Academy called the requirements a "substantive" change to the rules for the Oscars. The need to specify awards can only go to acting and writing done by "humans" is new for the academy. In recent months, there have been notable examples of expansive use of AI tools and technology to replace or recreate human work. The actor Val Kilmer, who died in 2025, is set to be recreated with AI technology in order to be a lead role in an upcoming movie. Last year, London-based actor and comedian Eline van der Velden said she had created an entirely fake AI actor to "become a global superstar". When the union representing Hollywood writers went on strike two years ago, a key issue in the fight was film and TV studios using AI to write scripts. Meanwhile, the basis of all AI tools are large language models (LLMs), which have been trained on text, images an video created by humans over the decades in order to produce their outputs. Hollywood studios, actors and authors have pursued lawsuits claiming copyright infringement against a number of AI companies. However, the academy did not issue a ban on AI use in films more broadly. Outside of acting and writing, if a filmmaker used AI tools in their work, such "tools neither help nor harm the chances of achieving a nomination", the academy wrote. "The Academy and each branch will judge the achievement, taking into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship when choosing which movie to award," the group added. "If questions arise regarding the aforementioned use of generative artificial intelligence, the Academy reserves the right to request more information about the nature of the use and human authorship." Technology has been part of filmmaking for many years, with the use of computer-generated imagery (CGI) being used widely since the 1990s. While CGI is largely considered to be a manual process, something done and perfected by humans to create elements of a film, AI tools are generally designed to automate the work entirely through the use of simple prompts.

The Golden Globes' AI Rules Are Way Less Strict Than the Oscars'

Late last week, the Oscars announced new eligibility rules with an eye toward the rise of AI. Acting roles must be "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent," while screenplays "must be human-authored." (You can read the full list of rules here.) Today, the Golden Globes countered with its own adjusted rules, and the boundaries are... somewhat blurrier. The Golden Globes cover a wider swath of media than just movies, including TV shows, made-for-TV movies, and podcasts. Moving forward, "the use of artificial intelligence (AI), including generative AI, does not automatically disqualify a work from consideration, provided that human creative direction, artistic judgment, and authorship remain primary throughout the production process," according to the Globes' new guidelines (read the full list here). "All submitted work will be evaluated based on the extent to which creative direction, artistic decision-making, and execution originate from credited individuals," it continues. "AI and similar technologies may be used as part of the production process ... but may not replace the core creative contributions of human talent. All submissions must include a disclosure describing any generative AI used anywhere in the production of the completed work, including if any AI alteration was made to a credited performer's likeness or voice." However, that doesn't mean your Tilly Norwoods have a green light to start taking over. "Performances submitted for acting categories must be primarily derived from the work of the credited performer. Submissions in which a performance is substantially generated or created by artificial intelligence are not eligible," the Globes caution. The use of AI "for technical or cosmetic enhancements"â€"like those freaky de-aging special effects flashbacks are so fond of usingâ€""may be permissible, provided the underlying performance remains that of the credited individual and AI does not replace or materially alter the performer’s work." AI tools can only be used "to enhance or support a performance that remains fundamentally human-driven and under the creative control of the credited performer, and that any such use is authorized by the performer." The Globes are careful to note that the awards will not consider "performances generated through the unauthorized use of a performer’s digital likeness, voice replication, or biometric data, whether or not the performer is otherwise credited." There's similar language applied to the non-acting categories, where work "remains eligible provided that the core creative contributions in the relevant craft (including but not limited to direction, writing, composition, and animation) originate primarily from credited human individuals, and that any use of AI or generative tools serves a supporting or enhancing role rather than substituting for that human creative authorship. All disclosure requirements apply consistently to submissions in these categories." In short: your Golden Globes submissions can use AI if you use it as an enhancement but not as a replacement, and you have to disclose when it's been used. Still, it feels like opening the door even a crack has the potential to be problematic; as has already become extremely clear, once AI slop worms its way into any form of media, it's incredibly difficult to shovel it back out again. Here's hoping Hollywood recognizes the responsibility that comes with this wiggle roomâ€"and that the Golden Globes can find a realistic and ethical way to enforce its new guidelines.

Academy announces major overhaul to rules

An Oscar statue is seen ahead of the 98th Annual Academy Awards at the Dolby Theatre in Hollywood, California, on March 14, 2026. Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images hide caption The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has announced several significant rule changes for the 99th Oscars, including AI protections for actors and writers as well as expanded eligibility for international films. In a statement to NPR, the Academy on Saturday said the changes are in response to listening to the global filmmaking community and addressing barriers to entry in its eligibility process. The Academy added that its rules and eligibility standards have always evolved alongside technologies such as sound, color, and CGI, and that AI is no different. Awards rules and guidelines are reviewed and refined each year. Among the most noteworthy changes, the Academy now explicitly states that only roles, "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" are eligible for Acting awards. In other words, AI creations like the much-hyped Tilly Norwood cannot hope to win a Best Actress Oscar anytime soon. Particle6, the production company behind Norwood, did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment on Saturday about its creations' ban from consideration. In March, Norwood commented, "Can't wait to go to the Oscars!" in an Instagram post announcing its newly released music video. The Academy also requires screenplays to be "human-authored" and said it reserved the right to investigate the use of generative AI in any submission. Meanwhile, qualifying flesh-and-blood human actors can now be nominated for multiple performances in the same category if those performances get enough votes to land in the top five. So, someone like Anne Hathaway, who has five major movies scheduled for release in 2026, could now theoretically sweep the nominations - though that outcome seems extremely unlikely. "If an actor has an extremely prolific year, might we even see someone swallow up three of the five nominations?," wrote Deadline's awards columnist and chief film critic Pete Hammond about the changes. "Probably won't happen, but it's now possible." Under previous rules, an actor could only receive one nomination per category. If they had two high-ranking performances in Best Actor, for example, only the one with the most votes would move forward. While international films can still be the official selection of their countries, now they can qualify by winning the top prize at a major international festival such as the Palme d'Or at Cannes, the Golden Lion at Venice, or the World Cinema Grand Jury Prize at Sundance. Historically, countries "owned" the nomination, and only one film per country was allowed. The new rules allow multiple films from the same country to compete if they are critically acclaimed, and it shifts the honor from a geopolitical entity to the filmmakers themselves. The changes have prompted a largely positive reaction from the film community on social media, such as on the popular The Shade Room entertainment and celebrity-focused Instagram feed, where commenters widely praised the "human-only" move to protect creative jobs. The Academy's Awards Committee oversees the rules in tandem with branch executive committees, the International Feature Film Executive Committee and the Scientific and Technical Awards Executive Committee. The rules are scheduled to go into effect next year, covering films released in 2026.

The Oscar Must Go to a Human for Performances and Writing, Says Academy

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has issued fresh guidance on who or what can win an Oscar, stressing that human creativity must be front and center if a performance or writing is to win one of the coveted awards. For acting roles, the performance must be "demonstrably performed by humans," while Oscars handed out for writing are a little stricter and "must be human-authored." However, when it comes to AI being used in post-production for special effects, the Academy says the use of such tools will "neither help nor harm the chances of achieving a nomination," and it will "judge the achievement, taking into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship when choosing which movie to award." The Associated Press notes that the Academy is also reserving the right to ask filmmakers for additional information about how they deploy AI and "human authorship." "Humans have to be at the center of the creative process," Academy President Lynette Howell Taylor tells AP. "As AI continues to evolve, our conversations around AI will do so along with that. But for the Academy, we are always going to put human authorship at the center of our awards eligibility process." As AI tools have improved, filmmakers have been able to do previously unthinkable things, like allowing Val Kilmer to appear in a movie after the actor's death. The Academy did not comment on whether Kilmer would be eligible for an Oscar when he appears in the upcoming independent film, As Deep as the Grave. Instead, it said it will review on a case-by-case basis. "We, like everybody in our industry and world, will be assessing this every year," adds Academy CEO Bill Kramer. Hollywood has already seen dead actors brought back to life, like late Alien actor Ian Holm, who appeared in 2024's Alien: Romulus thanks to AI technology. That the Academy will only hand out Oscars for acting parts and writing that are human-generated only seems right. But clearly, it is more relaxed about the use of AI for special effects. When the editor of The Brutalist admitted to using AI to perfect Adrian Brody's Hungarian dialect, it was widely believed that it derailed the film's chances of winning Best Picture (although Brody still won Best Actor that year). Since then, Hollywood has kept schtum about AI use in productions, which is peculiar given how much the tools have improved. As previously highlighted by PetaPixel, it seems very likely audiences are watching films where AI is being used somehow, perhaps in small and large ways, without realizing it.

The Academy rules AI performances are ineligible for Oscars

Filmmakers can still AI tools, however. Credit: Emma McIntyre / Staff / WireImage via Getty Images The Academy won't be handing over the golden statuette to robots anytime soon. In new rules announced May 1, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has ruled that AI performances are not eligible for an Oscar. Filmmakers can still utilize AI tools in their submitted works, but only human actors and human-authored screenplays will be considered for the body's highest honors. The move aligns with AI agreements won during the 2023 Writers' Guild of America (WGA) and SAG-AFTRA strikes and addresses growing tension over the presence of generative AI tools across artistic industries. For example, a recent trailer for the upcoming historical adventure film As Deep as the Grave, featuring an entirely AI-generated recreation of the late Val Kilmer, caused widespread furor among fans who recoiled at the on-screen digital likeness. Prior to his death, Kilmer created an AI version of his speaking voice with UK tech company Sonantic. Other celebrities, like Matthew McConaughey and Michael Caine, have worked with AI company ElevenLabs to clone their voices, as well. But while some celebs are getting ahead of their AI counterparts, others are fighting back against nonconsensual deepfakes writ large. Pop star Taylor Swift recently filed for trademark of her voice and image -- including the phrase "Hey, it's Taylor." -- amid a surge of synthetic AI likenesses of her proliferating across the internet, including ones used in data phishing scams. The Academy announced additional rule changes for international film and acting categories, generating buzz online after several contentious Oscar campaign races in recent years. For non-English films, a country can now have multiple nominated entries instead of the previous limit of one. Similarly, actors can receive multiple nominations in the same category if their performances rank in the top five.

Academy just said it out loud: AI can't win an Oscar for acting and writing

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has formally clarified how artificial intelligence (AI) fits into Oscar eligibility, stating that AI cannot receive awards for acting or writing. The updated rules, included in the 99th Academy Awards rulebook, reinforce that human contribution remains central to recognition in key creative categories. Human Performance and Authorship Take Priority Under the revised guidelines, only performances carried out by humans can be considered for acting awards. The rule specifies that roles must be credited in the film's official billing and "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent." This means that AI-generated or synthetic performances, even if used in a film, are not eligible for recognition. Similarly, the Academy has drawn a clear line in writing categories. To qualify for awards such as Best Original Screenplay or Best Adapted Screenplay, a film must have an explicitly credited human writer. The rulebook states that the screenplay must be "human-authored," effectively excluding scripts generated entirely by AI systems. AI Tools Allowed, But Not Awarded While AI cannot be credited as a performer or writer, the Academy has not banned its use in filmmaking. The rules acknowledge that generative AI and other digital tools can be used during production. However, their presence does not influence a film's chances of nomination or winning. Recommended Videos Instead, the Academy will evaluate how much of the creative process is driven by humans. If AI tools are used, voters will consider the degree of human authorship when assessing a film. The Academy has also reserved the right to request additional details from filmmakers if questions arise about how AI was used in the project. Why This Decision Matters The clarification comes at a time when AI is increasingly being used in creative industries, including film production. From de-aging actors to generating scripts and visual effects, AI tools are becoming more common. The Academy's decision establishes a clear boundary, ensuring that awards continue to recognize human creativity rather than machine-generated output. This move also addresses ongoing debates in Hollywood around authorship, originality, and the role of technology in storytelling. By setting these rules now, the Academy is attempting to maintain the integrity of its awards while still allowing innovation in filmmaking. What It Means Going Forward For filmmakers, the message is straightforward: AI can be a tool, but not a credited creator. Productions that rely heavily on AI for writing or performance may face challenges in qualifying for certain categories unless human involvement remains central. Looking ahead, these rules could shape how studios approach AI in future projects. As the technology continues to evolve, the Academy may revisit or refine its guidelines. For now, however, the Oscars remain firmly focused on celebrating human achievement in cinema, even as the industry adapts to new technological possibilities.

Oscars Ban AI Performances and Screenplays From Eligibility - Decrypt

Actors can now receive multiple nominations in the same category. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences on Friday ruled that AI-generated performances and screenplays will not qualify for Oscars, according to a report by The Hollywood Reporter. The update defines how the Academy will treat AI as studios use the technology to generate scripts, alter performances, and recreate actors, tying awards eligibility to human creativity and performance. According to the new Academy rules, only performances carried out by human actors qualify for acting categories. Those performances must be credited in a film's official billing and completed with the actor's consent. Only screenplays written by humans qualify for writing awards. The Academy's current rules, approved in April, took a more neutral approach, allowing generative AI in filmmaking while emphasizing human creative control in determining eligibility for awards. "With regard to Generative Artificial Intelligence and other digital tools used in the making of the film, the tools neither help nor harm the chances of achieving a nomination," the rules said. "The Academy and each branch will judge the achievement, taking into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship when choosing which movie to award." The Academy can request details about how AI was used in a film, including the level of human involvement, giving it discretion to review edge cases. The rules also address productions that use AI to modify or complete performances. By requiring that living actors carry out performances with consent, the Academy aims to limit the use of digital recreations in eligible work. The news comes as artificial intelligence reshapes Hollywood. In February, an AI-generated video of Tom Cruise battling Brad Pitt took the internet by storm. More recently, AI was used to resurrect Val Kilmer, who passed away last summer, for a "role" in an upcoming film, "As Deep as the Grave." Actors' union SAG-AFTRA warned that AI-generated performers threaten jobs and rely on existing work without consent, while actors and musicians have moved to protect their likenesses through trademarks and legal action. At the same time, performers such as Matthew McConaughey and Michael Caine have embraced licensed uses of AI, working with companies like ElevenLabs to create digital voice replicas. Meanwhile, in an interview with Decrypt, Silicon Valley star T.J. Miller said he isn't too worried about losing his job to the AI uprising anytime soon. "I'm not super scared that AI can take my job," he said. "As far as hosting and being very funny and getting the energy up, I am not afraid of losing."

AI actors not eligible for Golden Globes, say organizers

Los Angeles (United States) (AFP) - Performances by AI-generated actors will not be eligible for Golden Globe awards, organizers said Thursday, days after they were also ruled out of Oscars contention. The new guidelines will not automatically disqualify performances that have used artificial intelligence to enhance an actor, but require that a live human be the main element. "Submissions in which a performance is substantially generated or created by artificial intelligence are not eligible" for consideration in the annual film and television prize-giving extravaganza, which kicks off Hollywood's awards season, organizers said. "The use of AI for technical or cosmetic enhancements (such as de-aging, aging, or visual modifications) may be permissible, provided the underlying performance remains that of the credited individual and AI does not replace or materially alter the performer's work." The new rules come days after the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences said it was cracking down on the use of AI. The body that doles out the Oscars said only real human performers -- not their AI avatars -- are eligible for the film world's biggest prizes, and screenplays must have been penned by a person, rather than a chatbot. The use of artificial intelligence remains one of the most sensitive issues in the entertainment industry and was central to the 2023 strikes that shut down Hollywood, as actors and writers warned that unchecked technology threatened their livelihoods. The new restrictions come after an AI version of the late Val Kilmer was unveiled to an audience of movie theater owners, a year after the "Top Gun" star's death. A youthful, digital version of Kilmer appeared in the trailer for archaeological action pic "As Deep as the Grave," telling another character: "Don't fear the dead and don't fear me." The project was created with the enthusiastic support of the actor's family, who granted access to Kilmer's video archives, which were used to recreate the actor at multiple stages of his life.

Oscars: New rules announced - AI actors and scripts cannot win awards

The Academy has updated its rules for how artificial intelligence is used, including one that says all screenplays must be humanly created. There are more ambiguous statements regarding acting, however... The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has, for the first time, addressed the use of artificial intelligence in performances and scripts for the 2027 Academy Awards. As part of its annual review of Oscar eligibility rules, the Academy has tackled the issue of AI. While the new rules state that "the tools neither help nor harm the chances of achieving a nomination" and that each branch "will judge the achievement, taking into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship when choosing which movie to award," the Academy are reserving the right to request more information from the filmmaking team about the nature of the use of AI and "human authorship." "Humans have to be at the center of the creative process," said Academy President Lynette Howell Taylor. "As AI continues to evolve, our conversations around AI will do so along with that. But for the academy, we are always going to put human authorship at the center of our awards eligibility process." When it comes to the eligibility of performances, only roles "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" will be considered. The organization declined to comment on whether the upcoming AI-generated Val Kilmer performance would be eligible. "We will review that on a case-by-case basis," Kramer said. "We, like everybody in our industry and world, we will be assessing this every year." There is much less ambiguity in the screenplay categories, where the rules state that "screenplays must be human-authored to be eligible." Elsewhere, and in a notable shake-up, actors may now be nominated for multiple performances in the same category. For decades, it was not possible for an actor to be nominated twice for the same acting category. Additionally, the academy revised its longstanding policy that the category of Best International Feature only consider one film per country or region, as determined by a local academy-approved selection committee. From now on, a non-English language film can qualify by winning the top prize at one of several major film festivals, including Berlin, Busan, Cannes, Sundance, Toronto and Venice. A single country can now also have more than one film nominated in the category, and all the international films will be credited as the nominee, not the country or region. The Academy's changes come as industry tensions continue to grow. More and more A-listers are addressing the existential threat that AI poses, especially in the face of AI-generated actors making headlines. They also coincide with recent comments made by Evangeline Lilly, who has criticised Disney for firing Marvel employees, largely from the visual development team, as part of company-wide layoffs. This has led to speculation the company may be pivoting to AI for its special effects, although Marvel have made no official announcement confirming this. Lilly, who starred in Marvel's Ant-Man films, as well as appearing in Avengers: Endgame, took to Instagram to accuse Disney of turning its back on the people who built the MCU's success. "I reached out to my good friend Andy Park, who was the genius behind creating the original Wasp super-suit and concept drawings, and I said, 'Is this true? Is this really what's happening?' He said, 'Yeah, it's true.'" She continued: "I can't quite believe that... that Disney has let go of the artists who brought the Marvel Universe to life through their genius and that the people who invented these characters and who designed them are being replaced by AI. AI that will take their designs and take what they created and use it to create iterations of that. I am so sorry, Andy. I am so sorry to every one of the artists who were let go." Lilly wrote in her Instagram caption: "Disney, SHAME ON YOU for turning your back on the people who built the power you are now using to throw them away," before questioning the laws surrounding replacing human workers with AI. "Where are the laws that REMOVE all human art from the AI bank?!?" she asked. "Why do they get to steal our brilliance and use it to make executives rich while the artists responsible for feeding their robots go hungry?? Disgusting. California lawmakers...where are you?!?!?"

The Oscars bans generative AI in acting and writing categories

Only roles "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" will be eligible for awards. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences -- probably better known to the world as the Oscars folks -- have drawn a firm line in the sand against the use of generative AI, changing its eligibility rules to exclude AI-generated performances and scripts. The new rules, via The Wrap, state that in acting categories, only roles "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" will be considered eligible for consideration, while in the writing categories, only "human-authored" screenplays will be eligible. It doesn't represent a wholesale ban on gen AI in the filmmaking process, which wouldn't be realistic anyway: The rules state that the use of gen AI "and other digital tools" in other categories won't have any impact on the chances of a film's nomination for an award, although the Academy will "[take] into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship when choosing which movie to award." If questions about the use of gen AI should come up, "the Academy reserves the right to request more information about the nature of the use and human authorship." That's a necessary flexibility because, just as with game development, technology evolves, tools improve, and the use of gen AI for, say, early storyboarding probably shouldn't be cause for a film's exclusion for award consideration. And even making those allowances, the new rules represent a fairly strong repudiation of the stupid, exploitative future we are building for ourselves. Is it likely that an AI-generated screenplay will be worthy of an Oscar someday? I will say no. But the creation of AI 'actors' like the wretched Tilly Norwood thing, not to mention the money-grubbing obscenity of dragging actual actors out of the afterlife, opens the door to scenarios like the AI avatar of George C. Scott going berserk and actually accepting the Best Actor award for Patton 2: Hormuz Boogaloo. Like so many things once considered unthinkable that barely raise an eyebrow today, that might sound really dumb right now, but in a few years? The Academy will probably be thankful that it got out in front of the whole thing when it did.

AI actors and writers not eligible for Oscars: Academy

Los Angeles (United States) (AFP) - Actors created with artificial intelligence will not be eligible for an Oscar, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences said Friday as it launched a crackdown on the use of AI. New rules include a requirement that only real, live human performers -- not their AI avatars -- are eligible for the film world's biggest prizes, and screenplays must have been penned by a person, rather than a chatbot. "In the Acting category, only roles credited in the film's legal billing and demonstrably performed by humans with their consent will be considered eligible," the Academy said. "In the Writing categories, the rules codify that screenplays must be human-authored to be eligible." The ruling comes days after an AI version of the late Val Kilmer was unveiled to an audience of cinema owners, a year after the "Top Gun" star's death.

Oscars Organization Expands International Film Eligibility, Addresses AI in New Rules

The organization behind the Oscars is for the first time addressing the eligibility of films that use artificial intelligence in new rules for the 2027 Academy Awards. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences on Friday released updates across many categories, stressing the importance of human authorship while not banning AI. The new rules also include significant changes to the much-criticized international film category, expanding eligibility to include films that won top qualifying awards from prestigious film festivals like Cannes, Venice and Toronto. "As we do every year, we made a lot of, we think, really smart and progressive changes," film academy CEO Bill Kramer told The Associated Press. "Obviously, as the academy becomes more global, we need to think about how we are inviting international films into the Oscars conversation." AI and the Oscars As part of its annual review of Oscar eligibility rules, the academy is tackling one of the global filmmaking community's biggest concerns: generative artificial intelligence. The new rules state that "the tools neither help nor harm the chances of achieving a nomination" and that the academy and each branch "will judge the achievement, taking into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship when choosing which movie to award." They're also reserving the right to request more information from the filmmaking team about the nature of the use of AI and "human authorship." "Humans have to be at the center of the creative process," said academy president Lynette Howell Taylor. "As AI continues to evolve, our conversations around AI will do so along with that. But for the academy, we are always going to put human authorship at the center of our awards eligibility process." When it comes to the eligibility of performances, only roles "demonstrably performed by humans with their consent" will be considered. The organization declined to comment on whether the upcoming AI-rendered Val Kilmer performance would be eligible as the filmmakers have not yet submitted it for consideration. A likeness is not an actor, for one, but it might also depend on how Kilmer is credited in the film: As Val Kilmer or something else? One could also take Andy Serkis as Gollum as an example of a human collaborating with technology for the final performance. "We will review that on a case-by-case basis," Kramer said. "We, like everybody in our industry and world, we will be assessing this every year." There is less ambiguity in the screenplay categories, where the rules state that "screenplays must be human-authored to be eligible." The film academy has often had to review its standards to meet the technological advances of the moment, whether it be sound, color or computer generated imagery (CGI). Sweeping changes to international film eligibility As its membership has grown much more international, there have been increasing calls for an overhaul to the international film category, which had been continually criticized as unjust, outdated and subject to political interference. That's led to independent and dissident filmmakers often pointedly not being submitted to represent the country they're from. Last year's Palme d'Or-winner at Cannes, for instance, was "It Was Just an Accident," from Iranian filmmaker Jafar Panahi, was not submitted as Iran's official entry for the 98th Academy Awards, but France's. Under the new rules, "It Was Just an Accident" could be considered eligible because it won the top Cannes prize and not because a country chose to submit it. In addition to the Palme d'Or at Cannes, the Golden Lion at Venice and the Platform award at Toronto, other festivals with eligible qualifying awards will also include the Berlin International Film Festival's Golden Bear, the Busan International Film Festival's best film award and the Sundance Film Festival's World Cinema Grand Jury Prize. All the international films will also be credited as the nominee, not the country or region, and the award will be accepted by the filmmaker. The director's name will also be listed on the Oscar plaque, "after the film title and country if applicable." "That really reflects our desire to honor the film's creative team. That is how we approach other categories," Kramer said. "And as we become more global, as the filmmaking community becomes more global. I think it's really about a focus on the filmmakers and less a focus of the country." Actors can now be nominated for more than one award in a category The acting branch is catching up with the rest of the academy in allowing an actor to be nominated for more than one performance in a single category. If, say, this year's best actor winner Michael B. Jordan has two extraordinary leading performances in two different films in 2026, he could possibly get two best actor nominations. This is standard practice in the other categories. In 2001, at the 73rd Oscars, Steven Soderbergh was nominated for best director for both "Traffic" and "Erin Brockovich," winning the prize for the former. And about those original songs in the end credits The organization also clarified the eligibility of original songs used during a film's end credits. For songs in which the first music cue plays over the end credits, that song must overlap with at least the film's last 15 seconds before the credits roll in order to be considered eligible. This year's original song winner, "Golden" was a key part of "KPop Demon Hunters" and used several times throughout the film. "We never stop looking at ways to improve our eligibility process," Taylor said.

AI Actors and Scripts Officially Banned From Winning Gold at Oscars

The Academy can request more information about human authorship, AI usage The Academy Awards, better known as the Oscars, are tightening the rules for artificial intelligence (AI). New rules, released on Friday, specifically highlight that AI actors or screenplays written using an AI tool will not be eligible to be nominated or win the award starting next year. Additionally, the organisation behind the Oscars can also request more information from filmmakers about the usage of the technology and human authorship. The development comes as AI actors such as Tilly Norwood have gained popularity in the mainstream. Oscars Say No to AI In a press release, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences released the revised rules for the next year's Oscars, which will also be the 99th Academy Awards. While the new rules bring several changes to the qualification, nomination, and evaluation of the winners, the organisation also made specific inclusions to keep AI from winning awards in acting or writing categories. The revised rules mention that in the acting category, "only roles credited in the film's legal billing and demonstrably performed by humans with their consent will be considered eligible." This means not only that AI-generated characters are barred from being nominated for the awards, but also that nominated actors will need to have credits in the film's legal billing. This effectively bars AI actors such as Tilly Norwood and the AI double of Van Kilmer, which is set to make a posthumous appearance in "As Deep as the Grave." Similarly, the new rules also codify that screenplays must be human-authored to be eligible for nomination across categories. Notably, this was also one of the sticking points during the five-month strike by the Writers Guild of America (WGA) in 2023. At the time, Hollywood Studios had agreed not to use AI to write or rewrite scripts, nor to use AI-generated writing as source material. Further, the organisation has also added a new rule regarding generative AI, stating "the Academy reserves the right to request more information about the nature of the use and human authorship." This will now allow the organisation to ask filmmakers to share the extent and nature of how AI was used in a film, and to prove the authenticity of human authorship.

New Oscars rules ban Generative AI from ever being eligible for an Academy Award

Sorry, Tilly Norwood, no Oscar for you! The Academy has changed its rules for the upcoming 99th ceremony and beyond, banning AI-generated actors and screenplays from being eligible to win any gold. The news comes straight from the official Oscars rules page, which was updated as of May 1 to reflect a series of new changes. One of the items in the Special Rules for Acting Awards category states that "only roles credited in the film's legal billing and demonstrably performed by humans with their consent will be considered eligible." Under Special Rules for Writing Awards, it now says that, "In order to be eligible in either Writing category, an explicit screenwriting credit must be present in the film's legal billing and the screenplay must be human-authored." Page 4 of the rulebook does include that some uses of AI are acceptable regarding "digital tools used in the making of the film," as the tools "neither help nor harm the chances of achieving a nomination." Moreover, the Academy will "take into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship," and reserves the right to request more information about the nature of the use of Generative AI and human authorship. You might recall that Gladiator 2 allegedly (and unconsensually) used the likeness of various extras to generate an entire stadium of people... rather than just fill it with real people. You also might recall last year's introduction to Tilly Norwood, an entirely AI-generated actor created by Xicoia, the world's "first artificial intelligence talent studio," who made the headlines after reports claimed that several big-name talent agencies were interested in representing it... her. Whatever. While we've definitely seen controversy around AI-generated novels being released by Big 5 publishers, we've yet to see a big brouhaha about an AI-generated screenplay... but I'm sure it's coming. For more, check out our list of the most exciting upcoming movies in 2026 and beyond.

AI actors and writers will be ineligible for Oscars - The Economic Times

The Academy Awards will now require acting and writing to be human-created for Oscar eligibility. New rules clarify that artificial intelligence cannot be used for these categories. This change applies to submissions for the March 2027 ceremony. The move addresses concerns about AI replacing human workers in the film industry.Academy Awards organisers issued new rules on Friday to clarify that acting and writing must be performed by humans and not artificial intelligence to be eligible for ⁠the ⁠movie industry's highest honours. The changes from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences apply to submissions for the next Oscars ceremony, scheduled for March 2027. Generative AI has raised alarm in the ⁠movie and TV business as workers fear studios will use the technology ⁠to replace human workers to lower costs. The debut last year of an AI-generated "actress" dubbed Tilly Norwood, and its producer's boasts of interest from studio executives, added to concerns and sparked a backlash from the SAG-AFTRA actors union. Under the Academy's new rules, filmmakers can use AI tools but a "synthetic" actor such ⁠as Norwood would be ineligible for an Oscar, the group said in a statement. It said screenplays must be "human-authored" to be considered. The rules state the Academy can request additional information to verify submissions were created by humans.

Oscars to Screenwriters: You Gotta Be Human

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has addressed the way it evaluates the role of artificial intelligence in movies that could qualify for Oscars. Starting with the 2027 ceremony, Oscar's 99th, the Academy is reserving the right to inquire about the extent to which AI was used in a movie, as well as how it was used. According to Variety, to compete in either writing category (original or adapted screenplays), a script must have been written entirely by one or more humans who were living and breathing at the time they wrote it (read: no AI). Moreover, the Academy reserved the right to change its rules, as the ways people use AI change, but it underscored that it would remain committed to honoring the work of human beings. AI has come under greater scrutiny recently with the release of As Deep as the Grave, a movie that uses generative AI to bring the late Val Kilmer back to the silver screen. The actor's daughter, Mercedes Kilmer, has said she's OK with the practice. "I started off as a way to overcome the limitations of his illness, but then it evolved into something that he really was like, 'Oh, wait. I have a chance to actually set a precedent," she told The Today Show. "It's kind of fallen into two camps. People that maybe have a more precarious position in the industry and are worried and see AI as a threat -- which is absolutely valid -- and younger people, younger actors and musicians. I'm a musician and a lot of people that I know are so scared of this technology." The Academy has also updated its rules for other categories. Actors may now receive more than one nomination in the same category, ostensibly competing against themselves. So now an actor like Josh O'Connor, who appeared in four movies last year, could lock out every slot of the Best Actor category but one (if his acting were good enough.) Similarly, films from the same country may now compete against one another in the international feature category. Anatomy of a Fall, in 2023, wasn't able to compete for France despite nominations in other categories, including Best Picture. (France opted instead to submit The Taste of Things for Oscar consideration; it was not nominated.) The Academy also updated its rules for the casting and hairstyle and makeup categories. It also added regulations for how productions can campaign to win.

Oscars Set Clear Guidelines to Prioritise Human Creativity Amid Growing Use of AI in Filmmaking

The decision comes amid a surge in the use of AI-driven technologies within the global film industry. From digitally recreating deceased actors to experimenting with entirely virtual performers, advancements in AI have opened new creative possibilities while simultaneously raising complex ethical and legal questions. Concerns around authorship, originality, and intellectual property have intensified in recent years. Screenwriters, in particular, have voiced strong opposition to the use of AI for automated script generation, arguing that such practices could undermine the value of human creativity. These tensions have also been reflected in high-profile labour disputes and ongoing legal battles, where creators and studios have challenged AI firms over the alleged use of copyrighted material in training datasets.

Does the Oscars' AI ban really mean anything?

There's some good news for everyone who's tired of AI slop. Tilly Norwood won't be winning an Oscar any time soon. But beyond the headlines, how much impact will the Academy Awards' ban on generative AI eligibility for Oscars will really have? As announced on Friday, The Academy has changed several rules ahead of next year's 99th Oscars awards. The update includes changes to allow a single actor to receive multiple nominations in the same category and for a single country to have more than one nomination for Best International Feature Film. The rule that's sparked the biggest debate is a ban on AI, but it But crucially, the move isn't as sweeping as it sounds. It only applies to certain categories. An update to the Oscars' Special Rules for Acting Awards states that "only roles credited in the film's legal billing and demonstrably performed by humans with their consent will be considered eligible." Meanwhile, the Special Rules for Writing Awards now state that "an explicit screenwriting credit must be present in the film's legal billing and the screenplay must be human-authored." In effect, the 'AI ban' only applies to 100% AI work in the acting and screenplay categories. That's a long way from being a complete ban on generative AI. It seems that AI use will still be permitted in VFX and would not make a movie ineligible for categories like Best Song or Best Animated Feature - both of which went to KPop Demon Hunters this year. Page 4 of the rulebook clarifies that some uses of AI will be acceptable in "digital tools used in the making of the film," and that these will "neither help nor harm the chances of achieving a nomination". It goes on to state that the Academy will "take into account the degree to which a human was at the heart of the creative authorship," reserving the right to request more information about the nature of the use of Generative AI and human authorship. Unsurprisingly, the apparent fudge has left a lot of people unsatisfied. Some artists have welcomed the gesture, but others see it as a half measure. People are also surprised that it's taken the Academy so long to take an official position, which suggests it may have actually been considering allowing generative AI use for the acting and screenplay awards. Some note on X that these were the two categories where AI was least likely to win. "[It] doesn't remove AI... [it] only removes purely generated they were never really gonna win in the first place," one person writes on X. "If a movie is authored by a human and as long as the actors are human, they're basically saying AI can take all the background roles sans scripting and still win." "Most likely they are aware of what the techbros are saying to executives and are preemptively blocking them by removing the prestige factor. You can't advertise the effectiveness of an AI actor if it can't compete for awards against real people," someone else suggests. It remains to be seen how the ban on AI screenwriting will be audited. If a human writer uses AI to help with the process or refines a script originally generated by AI, how will that be detected? "It's just performative signalling that doesn't really do much. You can't definitively tell if AI was used, so the rule can never realistically be enforced," one person thinks. Since the Oscars are not banning AI from CGI my team will continue to work us AI for our effects from r/aivideo On the other side, AI enthusiasts claim the Oscars will lose all relevance through what they see as an "anti-innovation" stance. One person writing on X even describes the ban as "institutionalized bio-elitism". "You're banning the tool to protect the ego," they argue. In the end, the Academy's somewhat flexible approach might be sensible. The potential uses of Generative AI in filmmaking are so broad that banning it completely, would be limiting and impractical. Respeecher's AI technology was used to refine Adrien Brody's Hungarian accent and pronunciation in The Brutalist, for which he won Best Actor in 2025. AI is widely used for effects in movies, including to de-age actors such as Tom Hanks and Harrison Ford, as well as for processes like outpainting, upscaling, creating background imagery and optimising visual effects. There's a wider issue to address around how tools should be credited as AI becomes embedded in production pipelines. The real test perhaps isn't so much whether AI can win an Oscar but whether audiences are prepared to watch a movie where the use generative AI is obvious enough to be distracting.

AI actors and writers will be ineligible for Oscars - VnExpress International

The changes from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences ⁠apply to submissions for the next Oscars ceremony, scheduled for March 2027. Generative AI has raised alarm in the movie and TV business as workers fear studios will use the technology to replace human workers to lower costs. The debut last year of an AI-generated "actress" dubbed Tilly Norwood, ⁠and its producer's boasts of interest from studio executives, added to concerns and sparked a backlash from the SAG-AFTRA actors union. Under the Academy's new ⁠rules, filmmakers can use AI tools but a "synthetic" actor such as Norwood would be ineligible for an ⁠Oscar, the group said in a statement. It said screenplays must be "human-authored" to be ⁠considered. The rules state the Academy can request additional information to verify submissions were created by humans.