The acting is only as good as the prompter. This isn't a collaboration. A movie isn't just the work of the director, it is the work of everyone involved. This looks good for what it is, but compared to The White Balloon, a famous Iranian film made with few (mostly child) actors and a tiny budget, it feels two dimensional, illustrative and lifeless.

The problem the Arts has with AI is not that AI is good, it's that people don't have the literacy to tell the difference between good Art and bad Art and the best anyone can do in a void of taste is measure it in dollars. How can you place a premium on heartfelt meaning and expression when the facsimile is so much cheaper? If this is about saving money, just don't make or consume anything that maximizes savings. So why did the prompter create this film? To prove his AI mastery? To get contracts for his company? As a logical extension into a different medium for his AI practice? To make a political statement? Or to express something that he's been trying to find a way to express his whole life? Will the next thing he makes not involve computers? With an influx of money from this project would he then make a film "the old fashioned way"? I don't think this is any more about expression than playing Arctic Monkeys covers.