Amazon’s biblical epic House of David isn’t just retelling tales from scripture; it’s redefining how those stories are brought to life. Season 2, which follows the rise of King David, heavily incorporates artificial intelligence (AI) in a way that’s unprecedented for mainstream television. Rather than simply using AI for minor effects, showrunner Jon Erwin and his production company, The Wonder Project, have embraced it as a core storytelling tool. This has led to an estimated 350-400 AI-generated shots, a significant jump from the roughly 70 used in season one.
While initial reactions to AI in film often focus on its potential pitfalls – fears of job losses, creative homogenization, and even ethical questions surrounding likeness rights – House of David represents a bold experiment in leveraging AI’s cost-effectiveness and speed.
Erwin argues that the technology shouldn’t be viewed as a replacement for human artistry but rather an augmented one. He compares it to traditional special effects: “You can put a very real camera on a very real actor and direct that actor, direct the camera, and that becomes, in essence, the hand inside a puppet,” he explains. “The puppet itself is this digital world that you create.”
This philosophy has fueled the integration of AI into various production stages. Erwin’s team utilized tools like Runway’s “image to video” and Luma’s “modification” features alongside products from Google and Adobe, layering them together in a complex workflow. This approach allows filmmakers to craft expansive battle scenes, imposing fortresses, and sweeping vistas without the budgetary limitations that often restrict smaller productions.
The results are visually compelling. AI-generated imagery in House of David doesn’t exhibit the hallmark glitches or uncanny valley effects associated with earlier iterations of generative technology. Instead, it seamlessly blends into the overall aesthetic, particularly in scenes showcasing grand landscapes and large crowds – elements traditionally expensive to execute realistically.
However, this embrace of AI hasn’t come without pushback within Hollywood. Director Justine Bateman, known for her outspoken critiques of generative AI, sees it as a threat rather than an evolution: “It’s presenting itself as a solution if we had a business where we didn’t have enough writers or we didn’t have enough directors or actors or location managers. But we have the opposite situation,” she argues. “We have more workers than we have jobs.”
She, along with others in the industry, worry that AI will devalue human creative input and exacerbate existing economic disparities within filmmaking. SAG-AFTRA, the union representing performers, has taken a cautious approach, negotiating terms to ensure consent and fair compensation when using AI likenesses, but concerns linger about the long-term impact on employment.
Still, House of David demonstrates how mainstream media is increasingly experimenting with AI – not just as a tool for cost reduction, but also as a means of expanding creative possibilities. It remains to be seen whether this approach will lead to widespread industry adoption or spark further debate about the evolving relationship between technology and storytelling.
In the meantime, House of David serves as a real-world case study in how AI is reshaping the landscape of content creation – blurring the lines between the fantastical and the technically feasible, leaving audiences to ponder not just who told the story, but how it was told.
