Why AI script coverage is bad

AI script coverage (that is, script coverage generated by AI or “artificial intelligence”) is starting to take hold of the screenwriting space, and it doesn’t bode well for screenwriters looking for honest, critical feedback on their screenplays.

When I started this script coverage company in 1999, AI was firmly in the realm of science fiction. Even Spielberg’s feature film A.I. wouldn’t be in theaters for another two years.

But now generative AI tools like ChatGPT are becoming part of day-to-day life for many screenwriters and filmmakers. A quick search provides a dozen or more online apps and services offering AI to write a script completely based on prompts (textual instructions) provided by you, the writer. While most screenwriters are likely repelled by the very thought of a computer app taking their place, a market clearly exists for these AI services—services which offer their AI screenwriting tools under the fig leaf of “freeing up your time to be more imaginative” and claim to be able to “enhance character arcs,” “write captivating dialogue,” and “overcome writer’s block” and other argle-bargle.

AI script coverage doesn’t come close to coverage by a real human

What’s more, script coverage companies—especially who offer script contests—are now starting to replace their human readers and AI script screeners with AI, offering not only AI-generated script synopses of their customers’ screenplays, but AI-generated script coverage critique and commentary as well.

And the quality of the AI-generated script coverage, or AI-generated screenplay, is dubious at best. But don’t take my word for it. Read what No Film School had to say about it here, or a specific example of an AI written script here, or a more broad take by the Guardian here.

So how can you tell if your script coverage was composed by AI? It’s fairly easy to spot. Here’s a few telltale signs:

AI script coverage content is thin and/or vague

It offers little or no actual critique of the work. For example, there is little or no commentary on the strength of the characters, or the dialogue, the plot, or other story elements.

AI script coverage commentary can go on weird tangents

It contains non-sequitur commentary that has nothing to do with your script. For example, it may comment on your script through a “nanny-like” lens (e.g. you’ve written a script about drug use and the coverage contains the line, “Drug use is generally bad for one’s health and could lead to long term problems.” What?)

An AI synopsis can read as “markety”

When you’re asking an AI to write script coverage, it may assume you’re trying to display the screenplay in its best light, so it writes your synopsis as if it’s a one-sheet at the American Film Marketing, hyping your story up and trying to get buyers to buy.

AI script coverage tells you what you want to hear

When feeding a screenplay into an AI to generate screenplay coverage, a human generally has to provide that AI with a text prompt to tell it what kind of composition he wants the AI to generate. Often that AI will rely too heavily on that text prompt and you’ll see that text prompt or similar word choices appear multiple times in the script coverage.

AI coverage tends to have picture-perfect “voice”

AI script coverage, like most AI-generated text, very often reads as absolutely clean, organized, and perfect. Remember: when a human is writing a script coverage, she’s a human, so her thoughts will meander, or sometimes not land correctly, or connect well with other thoughts.

AI text, on the other hand, always seems to start out perfectly, move through its points perfectly, connect them perfectly, and wrap up with a perfect conclusion perfectly. Beware the perfect.

AI script coverage is not good with taste or indirect comparisons

AI is not good at determining taste. Is it good? It’s artful? AI can tell you how many characters are in a scene and make a list of beats where they speak and then vomit up a few vague notes about increasing tension, but it can’t tell you if something’s good. It can’t tell you if a scene or line of dialogue has true emotional impact on an audience. The only thing that can do that is a bag of meat and blood called a HUMAN.

AI coverage is bad at making abstract or non-linear comparisons and notes

For example, a script reader may include in her script coverage that the scene in your animated script that features a dog sled chase across the tundra has a similar vibe to the mine car chase in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

But an AI reading your dog sled script can’t do that.

Because an AI sees “animation, sled, dogs, snow.” If knows Temple of Doom (which it does because it scraped the internet to learn it), then it probably associates the mine car scene in Temple of Doom with “live action, mine car, cult thugs, lava.”

And at time of writing this, the LLMs aren’t capable of making that abstract leap.

So unless your sled dog screenplay has a lot of obvious, obvious cues that mirror Temple of Doom‘s mine car chase extremely closely, it’s probably not going to go there.

While I agree that AI screenwriting will likely improve as the tech improves, I see that improvement only happening by the AI models being fed the material composed by real writers, with or without their permission, in order to learn from that material. Which brings us to…

AI script coverage is using your hard work to train their AI models

How do you think these “AI” coverage companies taught their lil’ robots how to do coverage?

They taught them by feeding them screenplays and coverage. But whose? And did they have permission? (Hint: no.)

In other words, AI script coverage companies are using customer-submitted screenplays to “train” or improve or iterate upon the company’s AI model.

To put it still another way, the screenplay you worked so hard to complete is getting fed into a company’s LLM (large language model) and being used to “teach” a it how to write screenplays or write coverage.

And the coverage you’re getting from them? It was made possible by the company training its model on other screenplays: screenplays in all likelihood scraped from the internet or from previous customers, without concern for copyright, without concern for authorship, use, title, creativity, anything.

This is perhaps why so many of these AI screenwriting services and AI script coverage services can offer such low prices: no humans are doing any actual work, so they have little or no labor cost (perhaps some small costs associated with paying for their AI software, either via API or development costs), and the cost is so low to use either a cloud-based A.I. such as ChatGPT or a model they’re running locally (on their office computer, for example).

So they’re incentivized to keep prices low, for now, until they’ve fed enough customers’ scripts into their AI to make it “smarter” and therefore more marketable.

And if they’re telling you “We’re not training our AI on your screenplay,” they’re either lying or incredibly naive. All popular A.I. services (e.g. ChatGPT, Gemini, etc.) have a lot of pretty and dense language meant to assure as much, but when you start looking for clear information on how they actually handle submitted data (such as your screenplay), things get pretty opaque pretty quickly. The major companies are pulling out all stops to make their model the smartest. If a company is using a local model (e.g. an open source AI on a local machine), I assure you that that local installation is intentionally getting smarter with every screenplay its fed. Think about it: why would a company selling A.I. script coverage not want to continually enhance its results (and its bottom line) by teaching its local LLM, or even one they’re paying for in the cloud, as much and as quickly as possible?

Things to keep in mind when considering AI coverage and AI screenwriting apps

If you want an AI coverage company to critique your script, or if you don’t mind paying $50 to enter a script contest that promises to provide some AI feedback, or if you want to use AI to write your script, I can’t stop you, but I can give a few pointers to those who want to avoid paying for AI feedback or paying for lofty promises of screenwriting that AI simply is incapable of delivering, and will be incapable of delivering for many, many years to come.

Low prices? You’re paying in other ways.

Keep in mind that if the script coverage company or script contest is offering very low rates, that company is probably using AI.

They’re making their “money” by feeding your script into their LLM, meaning your script’s exact text and story and characters could provide the basis for someone else to write a screenplay or script coverage later.

Charts and graphs? That’s not script coverage. That’s called a spreadsheet.

Remember that the purpose of script coverage is to convey to an agent, actor, or producer whether or not a script is worth spending the time reading to consider for development.

If the script coverage is merely an AI spewing out box office numbers of previous films in a similar genre, or providing a graph of how the action rises and falls, or a graph of where the dialogue increases and decreases, it’s not a script coverage. It’s a textual analysis, not a creative commentary. Not script notes.

Producers can spot AI coverage and screenplays a mile away

Be aware that many if not most agents, managers, producers, and their assistants can spot an AI-generated screenplay or AI-generated script coverage on page one or two. If you fail to mention your script is AI-assisted or AI-generated when you send it in, and if the person you’ve sent it to has a functioning brain, that person will probably assume you are a fraud.

Even if you do tell them in advance that your script is written by AI, most people working in the film industry will probably not be willing to give you more than a, “Oh how interesting,” before ignoring it or at most giving it a quick curious glance.

When in doubt, ask if your script will be used for machine learning

Ask any script contest or coverage company whether or not your screenplay will be used for machine learning in anyway, or indeed, if your material is retained by the company at all after your service ends. If you’re comfortable with either, fine, but in my experience, most writers aren’t. Don’t be shy. Ask. And be ready to sniff out liars.

AI generated screenplays and coverage are not writing

Using AI even lightly (for idea generation, name generation, scenarios, etc.) is not something that’s going away, and is indeed part of the screenwriting landscape forevermore, and some might say that I can’t legitimately slam the use of AI any more than I can slam the use of a digital painting app or traditional screenwriting software.

But if you’re looking for feedback on your screenplay, just keep in mind that AI is being used by a lot of companies right now to generate that feedback, and that number of companies is only going to increase. You have every right to purchase AI-generated feedback, but you also have the right to know the difference between it and real, human script feedback. Be careful out there, human!

Beware:

The writing is on the wall for AI writ large: people don’t like it. The AI backlash is huge and it’s real.

So my bet is that AI script coverage will probably shift to a sales model of STEALTH. That is, before long, they’ll stop telling potential it’s AI coverage they’re selling and try to pass it off as human-written coverage.

At that point, it’s buyer beware to the max. You won’t know you’ve paid for AI script coverage until you read it and see how bad it is.

P.S. It’s not just me. John August and Craig Mazin think AI script coverage is stupid too:

Click the video to listen to the thoughts of two established Hollywood screenwriters on the topic of “AI script coverage.”