At this year’s edition of the Monte Carlo TV Festival (14-17 June), the “That’s (AI) Entertainment!” panel brought together industry leaders to tackle one of the most pressing and transformative developments in today’s audiovisual landscape: the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into content creation. Held at the Grimaldi Forum on 14 June, the conversation — moderated by Michel Zgarka, of Canada’s Hitlab — welcomed France Télévisions exec Toma De Matteis, Norway’s INN University dean Leif Holst Jensen and US-based producer Vanessa Shapiro, of Nicely Entertainment.

Opening the session, Zgarka invited the speakers to introduce themselves and share their takes on AI – whether positive or negative. The conversation continuously swung between optimism and deep concern.

Shapiro was quick to acknowledge the ubiquity of AI in Hollywood and its growing presence in television production. “We’re using it in our TV business,” she noted, framing AI primarily as a means to reduce costs, from development through to physical production. She also acknowledged the ambivalence that many feel: “There’s a love/hate relationship with AI right now.” Though the full-scale adoption of AI-produced content isn’t imminent, she predicted it’s only a matter of years before treatments and scripts written entirely with AI become commonplace.

Representing the academic sector, Jensen offered a sobering view. He sees a clear gap between technological innovation and institutional readiness. “We’re dinosaurs protecting our jobs,” he admitted. “Other people using AI will totally interfere with our value chain.” He observed that while the gaming sector has long embraced machine learning, film faculties are often resistant — afraid, perhaps, of surrendering traditional skills and prestige. Yet he warned that some tools, such as Veo 3, are already capable of producing images at a level that could rival professional standards, hinting at the first scene of the festival’s opening series, Watson.

De Matteis, a seasoned producer with three decades of experience in fiction, urged the industry to embrace change with the right mindset. “The industry has always been changing,” he said, recalling initial resistance to HD cameras when Michael Mann’s Collateral was released. What mattered, he stressed, was to “adapt and understand what the tool can give us.” While he acknowledged the environmental costs of AI-generated media, he remained pragmatic, suggesting a shift in labour from on-set work to post-production as AI tools become more prevalent.

Much of the discussion focused on the implications for creative roles and storytelling. In particular, Shapiro shared an anecdote from Nicely Entertainment, where data insights revealed unexpectedly high engagement with a title in Indonesia — an outcome that might never have been foreseen without machine analysis. “We use the Google tools to see who’s watching what — even by city, age group and level of detail,” she explained, illustrating how AI isn’t reshaping only production, but also distribution and marketing strategies.

Asked by Zgarka when we might see the first 100% AI-produced film or series, Shapiro acknowledged it’s not feasible just yet — especially in-house — but cited a recent short video created by two Wall Street Journal journalists using Veo 3 and freely available tools as an example of how accessible high-quality AI storytelling has become. “It was great,” she said, marvelling at the ease and speed of production.

Yet concerns remained. De Matteis cautioned against overlooking the environmental impact and higher costs tied to AI-generated media. He noted that the energy required to power large-scale AI tools and servers could significantly raise the industry’s carbon footprint and operating expenses, urging a more mindful and sustainable approach to implementation.

During the Q&A session, De Matteis also highlighted the blurred lines around intellectual property and plagiarism, stressing that while tools are advancing fast, the industry still has a duty to “check and pay if you break the rules”. Shapiro echoed this, mentioning that Nicely regularly conducts script clearance services before shooting — once even having to rename a character because their name matched a known porn actor.

Legal concerns aside, Jensen believed the more pressing issue was the educational sector’s reluctance to engage with AI. “It is easier for AI to learn and unlearn than for us humans,” he observed, calling for a redefinition of what constitutes knowledge and competence in creative fields. He spoke of a recent AI experiment with Cinema Synthetica, where several short films were produced in just 48 hours, including one by a 72-year-old director who had never worked with the technology before and hoped to make a film with his favourite actor — someone hard to work with on set — within two years. The results, Jensen claimed, would have been impossible to achieve only six months ago.

What emerged from the session was not consensus, but a clear call to action: professionals must engage with AI proactively, shaping how it’s used before it shapes the industry without them.