The question is not what artificial intelligence can do in cinema, but what will remain of art if the human touch disappears. In an interview with ‘An-Nahar,’ Jordanian director and screenwriter Suha Ismail pauses before the sweeping transformations in film production, affirming that the director will remain the cornerstone regardless of algorithmic advances, as only they possess what cannot be programmed: vision, imagination, and the ability to give an image meaning beyond technical limits.

The director is the compass of the story and the soul of the film. Ismail explains that the director is not merely a technician or crew manager but the leader of the creative process from start to finish. “They know how to translate the script into scenes, how to employ actors’ performances, camera movement, lighting, and music to serve the story. These intertwined elements require a mind that unifies them into a single vision, something algorithms alone cannot do.”

She adds that today’s internet is full of AI-generated clips, some visually impressive but lacking story and message, revealing the urgent need for a director to provide unity and meaning. Effects alone, Ismail says, do not make an enduring film; it requires a human mind capable of controlling rhythm and crafting the dramatic arc with awareness and refined aesthetics.

Balancing creativity and new tools, Ismail does not see AI as a threat but as an opportunity to reshape the creative process. “In pre-production, these technologies can simulate filming in full detail, from camera movement to lighting angles, giving the director a precise concept before actual work begins.”

Modern technologies can design full backgrounds, simulate costumes, makeup, natural and complex lighting, and even plan actors’ movements within scenes—tasks that previously required large teams and weeks of preparation. Yet, she emphasizes these tools remain neutral by nature; true value comes from how the director chooses to employ them to serve and enhance the story’s artistic and human impact.

New opportunities for young talents arise as these changes may alter the film industry landscape, enabling emerging directors to produce drafts or pilot episodes at low cost, allowing producers to discover promising ideas before committing large budgets. This is a real revolution in production mechanisms.

Cost reduction will allow ambitious ideas previously impossible to realize. Today, fantasy scenes or entire virtual worlds can be produced with limited resources, enabling independent works to compete visually with major productions and offering audiences broader choices and diverse experiences.

Ismail cites global examples of successful integration of modern technologies without losing human dimension, such as Martin Scorsese’s ‘The Irishman’ (2019), which used AI to de-age characters, and ‘Avengers: Endgame’ (2019), which transformed actor Josh Brolin’s performance into the high-resolution digital character Thanos.

Netflix has used AI-generated music in some productions, analyzing large data sets to create pieces fitting scenes and accelerating production. In Japan, the same technology was used to design backgrounds for the animated film ‘A Boy and His Dog’ (2023), combining hand-drawn art with machine outputs under precise human review, exemplifying successful human-machine collaboration.

Looking ahead, Ismail confirms that AI tools will evolve dramatically, from improving effects quality to developing software that assists directors in scriptwriting or analyzing expected audience reactions. However, she sees these technologies as tools in the hands of human creators, not substitutes, because cinema is fundamentally a human act requiring imagination, experience, and cultural and social awareness.

She concludes, “AI can save time and cost but will not give the film its soul or story. Only the director who can blend imagination with technology can create a work that remains in the audience’s memory.”