A24 Wouldn’t Tell Hollywood How It Works. Then It Told Google.

How does A24 do it? The entertainment industry has spent a decade trying to reverse-engineer A24 — low key, because unbridled envy is a bad look. But persistently, in the rooms where it’s safe to ask how a studio built on taste and restraint somehow produced both “Everything Everywhere All At Once” and “Backrooms,” and turned its own name into a marketing asset more durable than most IP.

And on that question, its executives remained frustratingly, notoriously silent. They don’t talk about their business, or anyone else’s. 

Meanwhile, the damn name supports robust merch, a theater, and a restaurant. People get A24 tattoos. If you’re a young film fan, “A24” has become shorthand for “I like movies as long as they’re cool.” 

And Monday, Google DeepMind invested $75 million in A24 to get inside the workflow that built it.

Workflow Becomes IP

Not the A24 library, but the A24 thinking. How A24 does it. 

The deal is a non-exclusive research partnership, which gives DeepMind access to A24’s production process in exchange for development of AI infrastructure and tools. Naturally, it’s framed as a responsible AI collaboration in which artists stay in control and the technology serves the vision.

And maybe it is. A24 partner Scott Belsky told the Wall Street Journal the new tools “won’t look anything like the prompted generation type of AI that people feel uncomfortable with.” I’m sure that’s true, but it’s also not the only part of AI that creates discomfort. 

Leaving aside all flammable debates around AI, it’s a little stunning to see A24 spend years fiercely protecting its how and then selling it to the highest bidder. 

The deal explicitly excludes A24 data, so Google won’t train on its films. However, A24 opened the filmmaking process itself to negotiation, and the partners hope to collaborate closely with A24 filmmakers.

Taste, Meet Infrastructure

The goal, like many Hollywood-AI partnerships, is to create AI tools for production and distribution. This one hits a little differently because for many indie-film enterprises (and perhaps none more than A24), workflow is culture. 

It’s how projects get selected, how filmmakers are encouraged to take risks, and how problems are solved when the answer isn’t “more money.” So while Google can’t access “Moonlight,” it can take a seat in the room where the next “Moonlight” gets made.

All of this comes on the heels of A24’s biggest theatrical hit with “Backrooms.” And, for what it’s worth, Kane Parsons singled out AI in a recent interview as of zero interest beyond interrogating it as a story idea, and identified generative AI as a source of “creative rot.” 

Parsons proved that independent creative authority can scale outside the studio system. Also true: His process is now adjacent to a deal that places the development of AI infrastructure inside A24’s workflow. 

Of All the People to Tell

It’s reasonable to believe that AI assists for storyboards, reshoots, and editing may move from optional to standard and then become the default. A24 is betting it can take the capital and the infrastructure without ceding the judgment that makes it A24. 

Belsky told WSJ that the tools will “preserve creative control and support risk-taking” — which could be a genuine structural commitment, or the thing you say before the tools become load-bearing. We can’t yet know which.

This is what we do know: The most credible argument in independent film, that taste and creative authority are a distribution strategy, is now a research asset. 

For filmmakers who view A24 as proof that the filmmaker-first model is economically viable, that’s worth watching. Between Martin Scorsese and Black Forest Labs, and the A24-Google deal, AI now makes its calls from inside the house. 

Future of Filmmaking Top 5

Weekly Recommendations curated by IndieWire Managing Editor Christian Zilko 

5. The One Trick That Will Get You the Most Success as a Screenwriter Specifically by Spyder Dobrofsky

If you’re looking to launch your week with a bit of practical advice about your craft, this is a great place to start. While the article is specifically about screenwriting, the general advice — that while every department on a film is an art form, our individual artistry sometimes has to take a backseat to the project’s larger needs — is applicable to anyone working in film and TV.

4. Are You the Best Distributor for Your Film? by Jeanie Finlay

We talk a lot about the dire state of external distribution and how filmmakers are often better off doing things on their own. That’s all still true, but there are layers of nuance to probe before you actually invest your time and money into striking out on their own. This interview is filled with specifics: what goes into the kind of bad distribution deals that we should be avoiding, what success looks like in self-distribution, and whether your film actually lends itself to a grassroots marketing campaign.

3. The $100,000 Confession That Changed How I See Filmmaking by Sophie Katsali

A compelling case for a topic that had not crossed my mind: more filmmakers need to talk about things that go wrong on set. Katsali argues that the hyper-competitive indie film landscape has incentivized every filmmaker to present themselves as an auteur with a singular vision whose films are only limited by resources. While self-promotion has always been baked into filmmaking, she argues that there used to be more formats for filmmakers to talk about what actually went wrong on set and the things that were their fault. Those are often the most useful tools for new filmmakers trying to figure out what life in the industry is actually like, and we’d be well-advised to try and find a way to replicate them.

2. You Don’t Need to Be an Influencer. You Do Need to Think Like A Creator by Christie Marchese

Another story about digitally marketing indie films that reaches a conclusion that everyone should be able to agree on. Not everyone is going to be Curry Barker and develop a large audience that’s compressed and ready to watch their first film. Not everyone is going to want to try! But everyone trying to release a film should be willing to steal some tactics from digital creators, even if they’re used in service of something more traditional.

1. The Unglamorous Financial Realities of Five Indie Filmmakers by Hershal Pandya

This detailed breakdown of the financial struggles of some very talented filmmakers whose work IndieWire has often championed is not a fun read, but it offers some important context that anyone trying to launch a career in this industry. For every “Backrooms” and “Obsession,” there are infinitely more stories like these.