Albert Serra and Bi Gan: The Ethics of Literary Adaptation – Why AI Lacks Innocence

Director Albert Serra and filmmaker Bi Gan clashed over the ethics of AI in storytelling during a panel at the 2026 Shanghai International Film & TV Market, arguing that artificial intelligence lacks the essential "innocence" required for authentic literary adaptation. Their debate, held June 21 at the festival’s official program, centered on whether AI-generated scripts or visuals could ever capture the emotional depth of human-created art.

Serra, whose films like Liberal and Bird Film often explore philosophical themes through minimalist storytelling, dismissed the idea that AI could replicate the vulnerability of a human author’s intent. "AI can mimic style, but it cannot have innocence," Serra told the audience, according to Variety. "Innocence is not a technique—it’s a state of being, something that comes from the uncertainty of the human experience." Bi Gan, whose work spans experimental cinema and commercial projects like The Eight Hundred, countered that AI tools could serve as collaborative partners rather than replacements, provided they were guided by a director’s vision.

The discussion came as filmmakers increasingly grapple with AI’s role in production pipelines, from scriptwriting to post-production. At the same festival, a separate panel hosted by the China Film Association explored how studios are integrating AI-assisted editing and visual effects—though no major Chinese production house has yet announced a fully AI-generated feature. Serra’s skepticism aligns with growing unease among European auteurs, including Pedro Almodóvar and Apichatpong Weerasethakul, who have publicly questioned AI’s ability to preserve cultural or artistic integrity.

Why the debate matters in 2026
Serra and Bi Gan’s exchange reflects a broader industry split over AI’s future in film. While Western studios like Warner Bros. and Sony have invested in AI-driven content creation—such as The Electric State’s AI-assisted script development—European and Asian filmmakers often prioritize human craftsmanship. A 2025 survey by the European Film Academy found that 68% of directors opposed using AI for core creative decisions, citing concerns over originality and ethical risks. Bi Gan’s pragmatic stance, however, suggests that AI’s role may evolve into a tool rather than a threat, provided it remains subordinate to human oversight.

How AI is reshaping literary adaptations
The tension between Serra’s purist view and Bi Gan’s adaptive approach highlights a key question: Can AI ever bridge the gap between source material and screen? Serra’s argument hinges on the idea that literary adaptations—like his own Bird Film, based on a poem by José Manuel Caballero Bonald—require an interpreter’s emotional investment. "A machine can analyze a text, but it cannot feel it," he said. Bi Gan, however, pointed to ongoing experiments in China, where AI is being tested to generate dialogue for historical dramas, arguing that human curation could refine the output.

At the 2026 Shanghai festival, the debate coincided with the unveiling of The Lotus Lantern, a co-production between China’s Huayi Bros. and a U.S. streaming platform that used AI to assist with dialogue localization—a process Bi Gan called "a stepping stone, not a leap." The film’s director, Wang Xiaoshuai, declined to comment on Serra’s remarks but noted that AI tools had reduced post-production costs by 20% without compromising narrative coherence.

What comes next for AI in filmmaking?
Serra’s stance has resonated with other festival attendees, including French New Wave scholar Jean-Michel Frodon, who told The Hollywood Reporter that AI’s rise risks homogenizing cinematic language. "The danger isn’t just bad art—it’s the erosion of what makes film an art form distinct from other media," Frodon said. Meanwhile, industry reports suggest that by 2027, AI-assisted tools will be standard in 40% of global film productions, particularly in VFX and sound design, according to a Deloitte analysis cited at the festival.

Bi Gan’s position, however, aligns with a growing trend in Asia, where filmmakers are exploring AI as a productivity enhancer rather than a creative force. At the Shanghai festival’s market, several delegations from South Korea and Japan expressed interest in AI-driven subtitling and dubbing technologies, which could expand their films’ international reach without altering the original intent.

Key takeaways from the Serra-Bi Gan debate

• Innocence as a creative barrier: Serra’s argument that AI lacks "innocence" frames the debate as one of emotional authenticity, not just technical capability.
• Regional divides: European filmmakers lean toward skepticism, while Asian studios are testing AI for practical gains without abandoning human oversight.
• Adaptation vs. automation: The discussion underscores whether AI can serve as a tool for adaptation (Bi Gan’s view) or if it fundamentally alters the creative process (Serra’s view).
• Market vs. art: The Shanghai festival’s dual focus—on commercial viability and artistic integrity—reveals how AI’s role is being negotiated differently in East and West.

As the industry navigates these questions, the 2026 Shanghai International Film Festival served as a microcosm of the broader struggle: Can AI be integrated into filmmaking without sacrificing the qualities that define it as an art form?