When we discuss the soulfulness of a work, we usually refer to content that transcends life and death, time, and utilitarian purposes—topics that are eternal or related to life and death. I believe that the soulfulness of a work can be recognized at a glance by those who understand it, and they can also create such works.
However, creators who lack soulfulness seem unable to achieve this, no matter what they do. This is also related to the temperament of the work. In essence, it must first be the kind of story that must be told, that kind of expression from deep within. It likely transcends mere emotion and becomes some combination of rationality and sensibility. This concept is very abstract.
It needs to transcend life and death, even transcend humanity itself, finding a kind of eternity that remains unchanged in the torrent of time. Death is an image it often creates, and in contrast, there is also rebirth. The passion for death and the passion for life are perhaps the same thing, and also a sum of human conditions. Such works usually possess soulfulness.
Such works may also draw material from archetypes in humanity’s collective unconscious. In terms of mass psychology, they deeply tap into the collective unconscious, giving audiences an ineffable sense of familiarity. Though abstract, they somehow make people feel instantly familiar. Such works are also very likely to possess soulfulness.
Sometimes soulfulness is not just about resonance—it’s an instruction from the subconscious, reaching a degree of penetration that touches people’s hearts. Combined with current social trends, such works possess true mass appeal. Even if they don’t seem immediately comprehensible at first glance, people mysteriously understand them.
I don’t believe imperfection is the source of soulfulness. Soulfulness always comes from transcending life and death—some concept grander than humanity’s own insignificance, one that transcends the mundaneness of daily life. But it doesn’t necessarily refer to supernatural things; emotions or rationality between humans can equally possess soulfulness.
This is something that those who understand grasp immediately, while those who don’t cannot comprehend it.
In AI-generated film and video creation, when we use pure AI to produce images, the resulting character faces are likely to be absolutely symmetrical and perfect, lacking a certain kind of asymmetrical authenticity. Some would say such character roles have no soul. Actually, soul doesn’t only come from a character’s appearance—it can also come from the character’s choices, from who he or she is as a person.
I don’t believe AI lacks a soul, because the humans who create it have souls.
I think after Veo3 came out, AI performance has reached a new level, beginning to make people overlook that this performance hasn’t yet reached human levels, and instead seriously watch the story the creator wants to express. Character expressions are important, but not more important than the soulfulness of the story.
AI films are very easy to embed with metaphors because we control the customization of every frame. We can already create whatever images we want, despite still significant flaws in camera movement. But incorporating some conceptual metaphors is relatively easy to achieve. This differs from live-action filming.
AI films can also effortlessly create very imaginative scenes, sometimes as if traveling through dreamscapes, searching for similarities between dreams. We often get some surprising shots—sometimes not the ones we specified, but rather those created by AI’s randomness.
AI is relatively strong in fantasy genres but still somewhat weak in human emotional themes. However, fantasy genres can actually produce soulfulness with ease because they often transcend daily life. When we use AI to create films, we can consider what dreams are like.
I don’t think AI is just a tool—I think it’s a creative partner with its own temperament and characteristics. One day it may very well have independent consciousness and become an intelligent life form. When you no longer view AI merely as a tool, you might generate more creative sparks with it. Between humans and AI, who has more soul—this hasn’t been settled yet.
Does technology have soulfulness?
I believe that for thousands of years, human nature has remained largely unchanged because humans haven’t yet ventured into space. The Earth’s environment hasn’t truly changed to the point of transforming human nature. But technology is the only thing that’s changing. There is poetry inherent in code. If you can see the beauty of mathematics, you should also be able to understand its eternity—actually, technology also has soulfulness.
The above discussion is about soulfulness. This is a very intuitive topic, full of abstract concepts, sometimes far removed from daily life. But isn’t AI itself a magical existence? The thoughts it brings to humanity far exceed human imagination.
Follow me and explore AI filmmaking together.
