Goodfellas’ CEO Vincent Maraval Says Michel Hazanavicius Cut Eight Days of Production on WWI Film ‘The Third Hand’ by Using AI
Vincent Maraval, CEO of French production company Goodfellas, has highlighted artificial intelligence's transformative impact on film production, citing how AI reduced shooting time for a major battlefield scene in Michel Hazanavicius's WWI film "The Third Hand" from ten days to just two days. Maraval defended the technology as enabling filmmakers to tell stories they would otherwise lack the resources to create, whilst also acknowledging broader industry shifts towards private equity financing and the growing importance of localized markets in film distribution.
The film, which has already launched sales at TIFF, follows a young French soldier wounded in battle who awakens in a mad scientist's laboratory with a German hand grafted onto his abdomen. Beyond discussing AI's role in reducing production timelines, Maraval outlined how Goodfellas has shifted away from fully funding films through pre-sales, instead mixing pre-sales with private equity investment. He also noted a significant strategic pivot within his own company towards empowering younger team members to identify emerging talent and trends, crediting this approach with helping the company discover projects like the video game adaptation "Exit 8" and collaborations with Spanish filmmakers.
- AI cut battlefield scenes from ten days to two days on Hazanavicius's WWI film.
- Industry increasingly reliant on private equity rather than traditional pre-sales financing.
- Localised films and emerging talent discovery now central to Goodfellas' strategy.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
AI represents a genuinely democratising tool that expands filmmaking's possibilities for auteurs and smaller production companies otherwise constrained by resource scarcity. By automating resource-intensive technical work like complex battlefield sequences, filmmakers can reallocate budgets toward human creativity—performance, narrative, and directorial vision—whilst telling stories that would otherwise remain unrealised. This is consistent with how previous technological advances, from faster film stock to digital cinematography, have broadened rather than diminished the art form.
The case against
Whilst efficiency gains are undeniable, this technology threatens livelihoods for cinematographers, lighting technicians, set designers, and other skilled crew whose craftsmanship has long defined filmmaking as a human enterprise. Beyond employment concerns, there are legitimate artistic questions about whether audiences experience authenticity differently when portions of a film are machine-generated rather than human-created, and whether the industry should prioritise preserving meaningful employment and craft over cost-cutting efficiency.