National Award-winning VFX expert Arun Kumar says criticism around Ramayana, Jailer 2 visuals based on growing confusion on CGI vs AI | HT Exclusive

In an interview with Hindustan Times, CB Arun Kumar, dean of communication, film and gaming at Pearl Academy, decodes the growing distrust around AI in cinema.

It has been 30 years since CB Arun Kumar began working in animation and visual effects (VFX), a time when computer-generated imagery (CGI) and artificial intelligence (AI) were jargon rather than in common use. The filmmaker who won a National Award for his animation work says the criticism of the visuals of films such as Ramayana, Jailer 2, and Dada reflects growing confusion among audiences.

The makers of Ramayana, Jailer 2 and Dada have been accused of using AI for their promotional material.

“When I started in the industry in the 1980s, exposure to visual material was highly limited,” Arun exclusively tells Hindustan Times, adding, “The real problem now is whether AI is making content more engaging, and I fear not.” The dean of communications, film and gaming at Pearl Academy talks to me about changes in the visual field over the last three decades and why promotional material for big-ticket films has increasingly made audiences sceptical.

Why India now picks apart every frame

Arun says that when he began his career, there was only one TV channel, and movies had to be seen in cinemas or on private screens. “Film and TV criticism was limited to a handful of people with access to newspapers, magazines and other platforms. And they shaped our perceptions,” he explains, adding, “Soon there were TV channels, VHS tapes, VCDs and DVDs. In the 2000s, online film piracy became common. Every citizen had unprecedented access to content, and everyone was a critic.”

When Arun says this, I refer to the recent accusations that the makers of films such as Ramayana, Jailer 2, and Dada used AI in their promotional videos and posters. “The controversies around these films reflect a growing confusion among audiences about how contemporary digital imagery is actually created,” he says, adding, “What we need to understand is that CGI, VFX compositing and generative AI are not interchangeable terms. A visual anomaly, an unrealistic-looking image, or even a hyper-real look is not necessarily evidence of AI.”

He also explains that the actual use of AI doesn’t make anything inferior. “The sad truth is that saying, that’s AI, is becoming a convenient label for anything we don’t like visually. It’s unfair to both traditional VFX artists and filmmakers exploring AI as a creative medium. The filmmakers need to be far more transparent about their creative processes. Showing audiences the behind-the-scenes efforts will help build appreciation and trust in the final product,” he adds. In fact, Arun says the audience's mistrust is so high that even Christopher Nolan has to go the extra mile to prove his work is entirely real, without the use of VFX, in films like Odyssey.

“AI is copying the digital look, and creators are using existing VFX classics to train their AI video models. It’s becoming harder for the lay audience to distinguish genuine VFX shots from pure AI shots. This is going to get worse as AI takes over the next couple of years. Everything will then look like AI, because it can imitate anything that has already been done by humans,” he rounds off with a warning.