AI Actors vs CGI: What’s the Difference? The Truth Behind Disney’s Prom Pact Backlash

Disney film Prom Pact became one of the most widely shared examples of supposed “AI actors” replacing human extras after viewers noticed several unusual-looking people in a basketball crowd scene.

The problem was that the characters were not generated using artificial intelligence. They were created with conventional computer-generated imagery, making Prom Pact a useful example of how easily CGI, generative AI and digital replicas can be confused.

Why did people think Prom Pact used AI actors?

The 2023 romantic comedy stars Peyton Elizabeth Lee and Milo Manheim, with one scene featuring a high-school basketball crowd containing several noticeably artificial-looking people.

Clips circulated widely online as Hollywood performers were already raising concerns about artificial intelligence, digital replicas and the possibility of technology reducing the amount of work available to background actors. The unusual appearance of the crowd led to claims that Disney had used AI-generated people instead of human extras.

Information surrounding the production later established that the disputed characters had instead been created through conventional visual-effects work. The wider fears about AI were genuine, but Prom Pact had become attached to the wrong example.

What is the difference between CGI and AI actors?

Computer-generated imagery, usually shortened to CGI, has been used in film and television for decades. Visual-effects artists can build digital characters, crowds, environments and objects before combining them with footage recorded on set.

A conventional CGI crowd could involve artists creating 3D people, building digital skeletons so they can move, producing repeated movements such as cheering or walking, and then placing those characters into the finished scene. Much of that work is created and controlled directly by visual-effects teams using specialist software.

Generative artificial intelligence works differently. An AI system trained on large amounts of material can generate new images, video, speech or other content from instructions and additional inputs, potentially producing synthetic people without artists manually constructing every individual character in the traditional way.

The technologies can overlap as production tools develop, but a digital person is not automatically an AI actor. Calling all digital effects “AI” obscures how the material was actually produced and can overlook the work of the visual-effects professionals behind it.

Why did the Prom Pact claim spread so quickly?

Timing played a major role. Prom Pact arrived shortly before artificial intelligence became one of the defining issues in Hollywood’s 2023 labour disputes.

Performers were particularly concerned about digital replicas. Background actors feared they could be scanned during one day of work and have their likeness reused later without being brought back to set or receiving appropriate compensation.

Those concerns became an important part of negotiations between performers’ union SAG-AFTRA and major film and television producers. When clips from Prom Pact appeared, audiences were therefore already familiar with warnings about studios potentially replacing human performers with digital alternatives.

The basketball scene seemed to provide a visual example of exactly what actors were warning about. By the time the distinction between CGI and generative AI became clearer, the claim had already spread widely.

Does that mean actors had nothing to worry about?

No. Correcting the Prom Pact story does not mean concerns surrounding AI performers and digital replicas were unfounded.

Agreements reached following the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike introduced protections covering the creation and use of performers’ digital replicas, including requirements around consent, disclosure and compensation in covered circumstances.

Background performers were included in those discussions because the ability to reproduce people digitally could affect whether productions need to hire the same number of human extras.

The important distinction is that CGI crowds and digital doubles existed long before the latest generation of AI. Newer technology could potentially make realistic synthetic people easier, faster and cheaper to create, increasing the pressure on existing jobs even if the concept of placing digital people on screen is not new.

What is a digital replica?

A digital replica is different again because it involves recreating an identifiable real person rather than simply designing a fictional character.

Production technology can capture or reproduce a performer’s appearance, body or voice so that a digital version can later appear or speak in material the person did not physically perform. How that replica may be used depends heavily on the agreement between the performer and producer.

That raises very different questions from creating an entirely fictional CGI crowd member. If a recognisable actor has been digitally recreated, consent, payment and limits on future use become central to the discussion.

Why disclosure is becoming more important

As synthetic entertainment becomes more convincing, another question is emerging around when performers and audiences should be told that artificial intelligence or a digital replica has been used.

Performer agreements are increasingly addressing disclosure where a real person is digitally recreated, while governments and technology companies are also exploring ways of identifying synthetic material.

That does not necessarily mean every visual effect in a film needs a warning attached to it. The more significant issue is transparency when technology recreates a real performer, generates a synthetic performance or could reasonably lead audiences to believe a human being did something they never actually performed.

Clearer terminology is part of that transparency. CGI, generative AI and digital replicas may all produce artificial elements on screen, but they do not involve the same processes or raise exactly the same concerns.

Digital crowds existed long before generative AI

Film and television productions have used digital techniques to increase crowd sizes for years. Stadium audiences can be multiplied, armies expanded and fictional cities populated without requiring thousands of people to be physically present during filming.

Generative AI could change how some of that work is carried out. Future systems may be able to produce large numbers of increasingly realistic synthetic people with considerably less traditional modelling and animation.

That creates two employment debates rather than one. Background performers are questioning whether synthetic actors could reduce opportunities, while visual-effects professionals are also considering how automation may change the amount and type of work available within their own industry.

Prom Pact unexpectedly became part of both discussions. It was criticised for supposedly replacing human actors with AI when the controversial figures were actually created through work carried out by human visual-effects artists.

Why getting the terminology right matters

Artificial intelligence is changing entertainment quickly enough without attributing decades-old filmmaking techniques to it as well. CGI, generative AI, deepfakes and digital replicas can all result in something artificial appearing on screen, but they are not interchangeable.

The difference also matters when discussing jobs and performer rights. Treating conventional CGI as evidence of AI replacing actors risks weakening legitimate concerns about situations where newer technology really is being used to recreate or replace human performers.

Prom Pact remains relevant to the debate for precisely that reason. The film was not evidence that Disney had secretly filled a basketball crowd with generative AI actors, but the reaction showed that audiences already considered such a scenario entirely believable.

As synthetic performers become more convincing, understanding how something was created may become almost as important as deciding whether it looks real.

Sources: Reporting on the Prom Pact digital crowd and SAG-AFTRA guidance on AI, background performers and digital replicas.

For more on artificial intelligence, digital performers and the technology changing television and film, visit SoapLandTV’s AI & Entertainment hub. Explore our Industry & Debate coverage alongside AI Films, AI Animation and Behind the Technology.