EXCLUSIVE: William H. Macy on the Power of Storytelling in an AI World
EXCLUSIVE: William H. Macy on the Power of Storytelling in an AI World

EXCLUSIVE: William H. Macy on the Power of Storytelling in an AI World

Actor William H. Macy will forever be connected to his breakout role as the worried and down-on-his-luck Jerry Lundegaard in the 1996 feature film Fargo. In that quirky crime drama, directed by Ethan and Joel Coen, Macy plays a car salesman in Minneapolis who has gotten himself into debt and is so desperate for money that he hires two thugs (Steve Buscemi and Peter Stormare) to kidnap his own wife. Spoiler: the scheme does not go as planned, and Macy’s Lundegaard squirms and stammers his way through awkward exchanges and encounters that later became the calling card of Macy’s acting, earning him many awards and nominations for his film and television work over the next 25 years.

Macy was back on the big screen in Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, during a time following the Hollywood writers’ strike when summer blockbusters are fewer and farther between. Coming off his Emmy-nominated work in the Showtime series Shameless, he played Trevathan, an opportunistic human who styles himself as Proximus Caesar’s chief advisor and teaches him human history. During the production of the film, Macy worked alongside the latest AI tools, which enabled the film’s actors and production team to see in real-time how some CGI effects would look after post-production work was completed.

In this interview, Macy talks more about his experience with that relatively new acting tool, but also shares his concerns about the influence of AI and other fast-moving technologies on society in general and the arts in particular, as well as his thoughts on the business challenges of the film industry and his proudest accomplishments, so far, as an actor.

Innovation & Tech Today: To start things off, we wanted to get your take on the increasing influence of streaming services on the film and TV industry.

William H. Macy: First, thank you for asking me to talk about this because people in my generation, I think, have a lot to add to the discussion, even though we have to find a 15-year-old to figure out how to work our phones. When I was born, people weren’t even dreaming about the world we live in right now, and when I graduated from high school, it was the subject of science fiction. Then, when I graduated from college, if you had told me that there’d be satellites up there, and I could [connect] one of them with a device the size of an ice cream sandwich, I would’ve said you were even higher than me. All these changes in the world, I’ll admit it’s got me flummoxed a lot of the time, and it vexes me daily, but it’s marvelous, [yet] it’s [also] dangerous.

We went from three networks to a billion [channels], and the result of that was a lot more stories got to be told… really unusual stories. Now that number is shrinking again, as we all knew it would, because there was just too much. But we are still in a new golden age of television, and the best work being done anywhere is being done on the telly now and through streaming services. I never thought I’d see that in my lifetime either. It used to be considered slumming at the end of your career to do television. Now it’s developed into something that you wish for [as an actor]. Not to be too “inside baseball,” but we recently had a strike, and a lot of it was about streaming. I feel I have been cheated in my career with the way the streaming laws are, so it was a legitimate strike, although completely unnecessary. I think the producers could have settled this way earlier, and it was really devastating. If you are Apple or Google, you can lose a million dollars a day, and it doesn’t hurt. But if you work for a living like the actors—or Warner Brothers, for that matter—it was devastating.

We’ve sorted it out to a certain extent, but the big issue that’s still dangling now is AI. That worries me a great deal. But, all in all, the last 10 to 15 years have been a glorious time to be an actor because there were a lot of stories out there, and a lot of people got work. It also coincided with the push for inclusion in our business. Hollywood very wisely realized that our movies had better start looking like America, or we’re going to lose the audience. I did a series (Shameless) that ran for 11 years, and a lot of new directors and writers came through [that show] and, to be candid, many of them were in way over their heads. But they learned a lot, and they turned out just fine. I would watch the crew… we’d get a director… sometimes you’d watch the crew and their eyes would be like pinwheels and we realized, oh Lord, this is going to be a long seven days. But you know [the crew] would just lift this director up and carry him or her across the finish line. And many times, they didn’t even know that the crew had done it. And the product turned out just fine because it’s television and it’s highly, highly collaborative.

I&T Today: We were curious what you thought about the future of going to the movies in the theater and how that experience is changing to help retain audiences.

William H. Macy: Well, they’re improving things. I went with my daughter to see Dune, and they had wired the seats, as they’ve done in some theaters, so that they vibrate. So, when the explosion goes off, it’s shaking your seat. One of the things I love about that is they turn the sound down a little bit, because when your seat is shaking, you don’t have to have it quite as loud. It’s [still] a great date night. It’s a great communal thing to do. So, I’m not ready to sign ’em off yet.

I&T Today: Can you just tell us what it’s like to be a part of the Planet of the Apes franchise?

EXCLUSIVE: William H. Macy on the Power of Storytelling in an AI World

William H. Macy: It feels good, feels real good. I’ve been in hits. I’ve been in misses. Hits are better! It was an astounding experience to be on the set, and it plucks right back into AI, which is what I’d like to talk about more than movies. Here’s a good use of AI: it’s not brand-new technology, but it’s all almost new technology. These guys and women who played the apes, they went to ape school, first of all, for I think six weeks, because it’s hard on your body, and they learn how to do the simian moves and how to run. For some reason, they had these little crutches they described so they could be bent over in that crouch and learn to run. And on the set, they wore a suit that had sensors that a camera could pick up to feed to the computer. And their faces had these little dots so that the computer could register depth and light. And then they wore sort of like a World War II flying ace helmet, and it had a GoPro that stuck out over their heads, and it pointed back at their faces.

When I was acting with them, I was acting with [the camera] over their heads. When they smiled, when you looked in the monitor, it was a chimpanzee [smiling] in real-time. So, when they raised their eyebrows, so did the chimp. It was them, but put through this filter. That’s not the final project, that’s just so the director and the actors and everyone could see what it’s going to look like, roughly. Astounding! I did one of the Jurassic Park films, and we’ve come so far since then. And when I did Jurassic Park, it was the best and the brightest work they’d ever done. And we’ve come a long way since then.

I&T Today: Dealing with that kind of technology when you’re acting, do you find it easier, or were there difficulties with that whenever you were doing the film?

William H. Macy: It was easier. And the old-timey blue screen or green screen—we still use that—but in the early days, sometimes you would have to make it all that. The only thing behind you was a blue screen, and you had some of your props, so you had to imagine it all. Now, because of that technology, you can get a good idea of what it’s going to look like. And they’ve gotten better at marrying these magnificent sets that they build, and they go up to pretty much six feet. And then above that is all computer-generated. People are getting good at mixing the two.

One of the things I’ve learned is that the old-fashioned, off-the-shelf magic trickery sells better and amazes people more than the fully realized, completely computer-generated images. I did a David Mamet play called O Hell! [Two One-Act Plays] at Lincoln Center, and we had a lot of magic in it. It was all off the shelf, nothing tricky. And people were absolutely flummoxed by it. They fell for it hook, line, and sinker, and they were delighted.

I&T Today: How do you think the entertainment industry helps people accept new technology or adopt it into their lives? Do you think it’s helping the audience accept it more as they watch the new films?

William H. Macy: Well, that’s a fool’s errand. The audience is going to be in it or out, and there’s no convincing them—no advertising, no knowledge. They’re going to be in the plot and completely vicariously give in to the story, or they’re not. And there’s no convincing them because the audience is smarter than we filmmakers are every day of the week.

But I think we are at a dangerous point. Getting back to technology and AI… In 1943, we split the atom and created the nuclear age, and we spent a lot of time and energy trying to figure out how to control that. And whether you believe that we should have built a bomb or not, it’s a danger, and it’s changed everything because of the threat of it.

And when the internet came about, we thought, “How marvelous.” And it’s only now that we’re realizing there’s a very dark side to the internet. It’s addicting to kids. I mean, you take the internet versus a 14-year-old… not a fair fight, and it’s free to everyone. And I know there are free speech issues here, but in 1924, if a politician gave a speech and he lied through his teeth, it might make the paper in that town, and maybe another paper or two would pick it up. But I believethe  truth is more powerful than a lie because a lie can only survive with more lies to support it. And the truth can stand on its own because it has the gravity and the weight of truth and common sense to it.

Nowadays, a politician can lie, and it goes to millions of people, and eight hours later, it’s hundreds of millions of people. And the amount of damage that can be done is almost incalculable.

With things like the internet, we’re now just realizing we have to control this. There’s a dark side to it, and as marvelous as it is—and it’s walking down the street and somebody asks you a question, and you’ve got the Library of Congress in your back pocket—that’s a good thing. But there is a dark side, and we are now, after the genie is way out of the bottle and thriving, thank you very much, trying to figure out how to control it—how to get some of it back in the bottle. And here we are on the cusp of AI.

To get to the answer to your question about what we can do to help the audience accept this new technology—I think, one, we have to realize that it’s not all good. There’s a very, very dark side to this technology.

We had a strike, alright, and it was about money and it was about streaming bonuses, but it was also about AI. And I’ve always thought that the people who make movies—the producers, the actors, everyone—we’re all artists coming together to tell the story. And the producers are artists too. They find these stories, the stories that they think are worth being told, and they put the team together. And that’s an artistic endeavor.

And yet there are some on that side who are defending AI. And I’m horrified by that notion because we’ve been telling stories since the dawn of man, and the reason we tell stories is it’s the best way to communicate.

A politician can have much to say, but his advisors will tell him or her to put it in a story—tell it in a story—because stories are powerful. It’s all three-act structure, and it’s been three-act structure since we were Cro-Magnons at the fire. So now we’re at the cusp of—what if the movie wasn’t written by a human being? What if the score wasn’t written by a human? We’re going to lose the audience, because that’s fraud.

And the other thing we’re going to do is we’re going to rob ourselves of our ability to tell stories well.

Here’s an example: what if AI had taken over writing before the pandemic? That means all the stories, all the movies, all the books after that would not be informed by the pandemic, which changed us. It changed us all in ways that are hard to define. It’s in ways that it’s hard for us to understand. And yet none of our stories would reflect that, because all AI can do is take what’s gone before and remix it. And they can put the facts in. But the purpose of stories—of the theater, of the cinema, of books, of plays, of movies—is to tell the story of what it means to be human, to bring to the stage the life of the human soul. And for that we have to dig deep. And I don’t think a computer can ever do that, because AI can’t think. Not really.

I know there’s a lot of argument, but I don’t think [AI] can think like a human. And it can’t feel. And it can’t explore something that is indefinable, but that you know is real.

EXCLUSIVE: William H. Macy on the Power of Storytelling in an AI World

I love a story about John Lennon and Paul McCartney. Paul was showing [John] Let It Be, and he sang it when they didn’t know the lyrics—they just made up all the lyrics—and he sang, “the movement you need is on your shoulder.” And John jumped out of his chair and said, “That’s fantastic! You’ve got to keep that in!” When I hear that song and I hear that line, “the movement you need is on your shoulder,” I go, I get that. I get that. I dunno what it means, but God, that’s really true.

And the thing about AI is that it can’t make mistakes. And Darwin taught us that some of the greatest advancements are happy mistakes. And “the movement you need is on your shoulder” is one of those happy mistakes.

If we’re not careful, it’s all going to be elevator music. I mean, I will see anything that Meryl Streep does or Steve Carell. I’ll see anything that they do. But what if I’m not sure that it was her? Or what if I’m not sure it was all her? Then I’m not going to go. It offends me. It’s fraud. It’s lying. It’s thievery on some level.

We ain’t there yet. And my notion is this—as you said—you can’t put the genie back in the bottle, and you can’t stop progress. You can’t unlearn, you can’t “unsee” something. But the federal government could pass a law right now that anything—any AI you use—has to be watermarked, and let the audience decide. So that if it says, “Starring Dustin Hoffman,” I know it’s Dustin Hoffman, because they’re required by law to say it’s mostly Dustin Hoffman. It’s really dangerous stuff, and we should learn from the nuclear age and from the internet. Let’s put some boundaries on it now. That’s what I think.

I&T Today: You have created an emotional connection with your audiences throughout your career. Do you have a favorite role or connection with an audience that you have enjoyed through the years?

William H. Macy: Oh, definitely. The series I did, Shameless, was just a complete mitzvah for me in my career. I learned so much about acting. I threw away these tropes that I thought were true, and I realized it’s not working—it’s just something you do. And I was really proud of the writing. I was in the writer’s room a good bit, and a lot of great stories began with, “What if…” And we would go off to the craziest places. And I don’t think AI can say, “What if…” AI can only regurgitate what’s come before. So that was huge.

Fargo changed my life, and I saw it recently for the first time in many years, and it’s a magnificent movie. I was so proud to be a part of that. The story, the writing, the acting—it was just as good as it gets.

I did a lot of work with David Mamet. I was lucky enough to be in the first production of American Buffalo. It’s a perfect play. Gary Ross wrote a movie called Pleasantville, which I find just as astounding—so imaginative. I was really proud to be in it.

My friend Steven Schachter, whom I wrote with for many, many years—we did a film called Door to Door about a fellow with cerebral palsy, and I got to play him. His name’s Bill Porter, a real guy with cerebral palsy, and he was a door-to-door salesman and outsold every other guy. And he did it because of his mom. It’s such a moving story. Such a tremendous man he was.

I got in a lot of trouble after the fact—this was a long time ago—because it was before it was a hot-button topic of me playing someone with a disability. And I got to say, I don’t agree with that. We’re actors… We’re actors. I don’t think we want to go down that path. If you’re Jewish, you can’t play a Protestant person? If you’re Protestant, you can’t play a Jew? No, I can play anything I get the part of, and I don’t think we want to go down that path. It’s artists’ jobs to find the truth in every situation.

I&T Today: What kind of advice would you give to up-and-coming actors, or even young individuals who are trying to embrace technology—or how much to embrace—going into the world as adults? What would you say to them?

William H. Macy: Well, I have a practical example. After the pandemic, everything—all auditions—went to self-tapes. And it’s a whole different animal than going into the room and having someone read with you and having the folks behind the table. Don’t get me wrong, that sucked [too]. [Auditions are] the worst part of the business, but self-tapes are almost worse.

My daughter is an actor, and at one point, she was in despair. She had sent off 80 of them and not gotten the role. And on the vast majority of them, never heard back. Not good, not bad. It just went off into the ether. And my advice to her was, you got to figure out some way to enjoy acting every time you do it. And even though it’s a self-tape and such a rarefied version of acting—find the joy in it. That’s the only advice I can give.

And there’s a lot of talk about actors branding themselves. Don’t do that. My advice is: don’t do that. That’s self-limiting. I mean, I think you have to know yourself. But if they call me in to play a handsome rogue, I’m going to go. I’m going to go for the audition. I’m going to try to do it. Me as a handsome rogue is a ludicrous notion, but I’m going to let other people say that’s a ludicrous notion—not me. I’m going to say, yeah, I can do that. You need a guy that can ride a unicycle and juggle at the same time? Sure. When do you need me?

Dump this branding thing. I think it’s horseshit. What does that have to do with art? It’s like Picasso saying, “I had this idea for a blue period, but you know what? It’s not really on brand for me.”

What else would I say? I think we as artists—all of us—should insist that we know what artificial intelligence is and what is real.

I’ve started—and everybody laughs at me, and the rest of them think I’m bizarre—I put my name on every single thing that I write. Every text, every email, everything. If I don’t write “Bill,” then I’ll put a “B”… every single one. Even when it’s back and forth. It’s my little protest against the internet.

I don’t read what people write about me. But every once in a while, I’ve gone there, and I’ve seen it—and they don’t sign it—and it’s vicious. And they wouldn’t say it to my face. They wouldn’t even say it in public. There’s just this freedom to be as vitriolic and as ugly as you can because they don’t put their names to it. So, I sign everything.

I would say, as artists and as audience members, let us make the decision. Because money talks—everything else walks. And if a film comes out that was written by a computer and no one goes to see it, that’ll do more than anything else.

We will do what the audience wants. It’s back to your question about whether or not we’ll keep going to the theater? Yeah, because I don’t think we can replace that experience anywhere else. And maybe the young folks aren’t going to the theater, but Lord, they’re spending hundreds… thousands of dollars to see Taylor Swift in person. Because even though you can watch her on TV, it’s not the same. I’ve been there. She’s stunning. She’s jaw-dropping in person. She’s really impressive on TV, but they’ve got cuts on TV that they don’t have in live performance.

Picture of By Lindsey Feth & Charles Warner

By Lindsey Feth & Charles Warner

Lindsey Feth is the managing editor of I&T Today. Charles Warner is the editor-in-chief of I&T Today.

All Posts

More
Articles

[ninja_form id=16]

SEARCH OUR SITE​

Search

GET THE LATEST ISSUE IN YOUR INBOX​

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER NOW!​

* indicates required

 

We hate spam too. You'll get great content and exclusive offers. Nothing more.

TOP POSTS THIS WEEK

INNOVATION & TECH TODAY - SOCIAL MEDIA​