Peter Chan Says AI Will Replace ‘Any Blockbuster or Commercial Film in Three Years’ at Hong Kong FilMart Panel

Legendary Asian filmmaker Peter Chan Ho-sun issued a stark warning about artificial intelligence at a Hong Kong FilMart co-production panel, predicting that the technology poses an existential threat not to art-house cinema but to the commercial blockbuster.

“I think we’re at the worst times. Those days of the blockbusters are gone. We’re experiencing now what I learned when I went to Hollywood in the late 90s. Nobody knows anything.”

Related Stories

Taylor Swift Set to Appear on iHeartRadio Music Awards Show

'Heated Rivalry,' Cynthia Erivo and Lady Gaga Win Big at Queerties Awards: Full Winners List

“With the fragmented [markets], with the vertical short dramas, with AI, and with cinemas closing. I think we’re at the worst times.”

That was the pronouncement of Chan (“She’s Got No Name,” “Dragon”) on a panel discussing the state of international co-productions.

Chan is no stranger to blockbuster filmmaking, having alternated between cosy human dramas (“Comrades: Almost a Love Story”) and large scale epics (“Warlords”) in his career.

“I don’t think AI is an enemy to auteur film. But AI would be an enemy to mediocre blockbusters,” said Chan. “Basically, AI can replace any blockbuster or commercial film in three years, I believe.”

The panel was moderated by Asian Film Alliance Network secretary general Lorna Tee. Panellists touched on the necessity of co-productions in creating multiple home territories, changes in marketing that favour the personal touch, and how American audiences have finally caught up to subtitles.

“After the pandemic, we had a significant decrease in terms of cinema audiences [in Malaysia]. Our latest film, ‘Blood Brothers,’ which collected about MYR78 million [$19.8 million], we took it as a ceiling almost and that is equivalent to only 4 million audiences,” said Sharmin Yusof, CEO of Malaysia’s SKOP Productions. “There’s only a certain ceiling that we can hit in Malaysia, so we have decided to expand into Indonesia, and also Thailand.”

“I think it’s easier for animation to create this type of worldwide stories. It’s easier to do co-production because you can split the work,” said Oscar-winning producer Ron Dyens (“Flow”). “When you do co-production in live action, you need to respect also the place to shoot because of the background, the culture, the language. But in animation you can do the layout in one country, you can do the animation in another country, you can do the compositing in another country.”

“[Co-productions were] born out of the necessity of the fact that HK cinema was no longer self-sufficient. In terms of returns, audience, the changing of the landscape of Hong Kong film industry which [stopped being] a supplier for Chinese language films across Southeast Asia and even East Asia,” said Chan. “You need to put in elements from different countries so they feel that the film belongs to that country. We ended up making movies that had more than one domestic market, which was very important.”

“I’m starting to see co-production films where there are more and more countries involved from 9, 10, 11 or 12 countries.” Of course, it inflates the budget. But I also see a lot of excess and waste,” said Singaporean filmmaker Anthony Chen who advocated for a  “more prudent, ethical” model of co-production which doesn’t force directors to carve up their film’s creative process.

Panellists were divided on the impact of streamers in the co-production world.

Janet Yang, president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences from 2022 to 2025, noted that their impact on American audiences was undeniable.

“I think the streamers have helped people get used to watching subtitles. I think a lot of the barriers to crossing boundaries between nations has dissolved, really. I have seen huge changes. The fact that a non-English language film could win best picture as in ‘Parasite,’ was mind-boggling,” said Yang.

Chan, on the other hand, decried the over-reliance on data analytics by streaming platforms in shaping film content to suit audiences, and cautioned that it could have a misleading effect on film marketing.

“Big data. That’s one of the dirtiest words I’ve ever heard for creative people,” said Chan. “A lot of these so-called big data could actually end up killing the film. Because you’re trying to make the campaign as commercial as it can be, and the film might not necessarily be about that.”

Yusof echoed the sentiment and stressed that producers must ensure authenticity in marketing films, and pointed to the personal touch that has come back into fashion in film marketing.

“You know, like there is a sincerity, there’s a truth, there’s an honesty in the film. people are interested to be more involved with the movie,” said Yusof. “We stopped doing road tours for a decade, before the pandemic. Now, the road tour marketing has come back because people are there. They turn up for you, they want to meet the cast, they want to hear you talk. On-ground activations get you closer to the audience. To make sure that they know you appreciate them and also to get them more involved behind the scenes.”

Yang suggested that the future of film marketing lay in the individual creator.

“For me, the future looks like a lot more of personal branding. YouTube is already the largest media company in the world,” said Yang. “And I think it will become more and more incumbent upon artists to carve their own path and become their own ecosystem in a way. Make things. Own them. Distribute them on our own.”