Gal Gadot AI Movie Controversy Explained

Gal Gadot has defended her decision to star in Doug Liman’s upcoming thriller Bitcoin, formerly titled Bitcoin: Killing Satoshi, after the movie drew criticism for using artificial intelligence to generate much of its sets, backgrounds and lighting. The $70 million production was shot largely inside a custom gray-screen soundstage in London, with producers saying AI allowed them to create a film that would have cost more than $300 million using conventional locations and production methods. Gadot said she was initially afraid of the technology and spent six months negotiating contractual protections preventing AI from altering her performance, but argued that actors and filmmakers must learn how to work with AI rather than ignore it. The production has become a prominent example in Hollywood’s ongoing debate over whether generative AI can reduce filmmaking costs without displacing creative workers.

Gal Gadot Defends The AI Movie

Gadot addressed the controversy during an appearance on Josh Horowitz’s Happy Sad Confused podcast. She acknowledged that she was afraid of artificial intelligence but said she believed the technology had already become part of the film industry. [Variety] [TheWrap]

Gadot said filmmakers would either have to learn to work with AI or risk being left behind. She described her approach as trying to educate herself about the technology while protecting the aspects of acting that she did not want AI to control. [Variety]

Gadot Spent Six Months Negotiating AI Protections

Gadot said negotiations over her contract lasted approximately six months because of concerns about how AI could be used. Her lawyers attempted to address different scenarios involving digital manipulation of her performance. [Variety]

She specifically required protections preventing AI from altering her acting. Gadot said she did not want artificial intelligence changing her performance, expressions or other elements of what she did on camera. [Variety]

Gadot said SAG-AFTRA contacted her lawyers for guidance. According to Gadot, the union asked about contractual language her legal team developed as it considered protections for other performers dealing with AI. [Variety]

AI Was Used For Sets And Lighting

The production says AI was used primarily to construct environments and lighting around live-action performances. Gadot emphasized that the technology was not intended to replace or regenerate the actors themselves. [TheWrap]

Actors were filmed in a largely bare gray-screen environment. The London soundstage contained limited physical scenery and props, with large portions of the finished environments added through AI-assisted post-production. [TheWrap]

Traditional location photography was largely replaced by generated environments. The film’s story involves approximately 200 locations ranging from Antarctica and Antigua to Las Vegas. [TheWrap]

The Movie Was Shot In A “Gray Box”

The filmmakers converted a former car showroom in West London into a custom soundstage. The production referred to the space as the “gray box.” [TheWrap]

Gray screens surrounded the actors instead of conventional finished sets. Producers said tests involving traditional blue and green screens produced inferior results for the AI workflow. [TheWrap]

The physical set still included costumes, props and selected structural pieces. Stairs, platforms and other practical elements were constructed when performers needed to physically interact with them. [TheWrap]

Producers Say AI Cut A $300 Million Movie To $70 Million

Producer Ryan Kavanaugh said a conventional version of the film was budgeted at more than $300 million. The large number of international locations would have required extensive travel, construction and visual-effects work. [TheWrap]

The AI-based production cost approximately $70 million, according to the producers. They say the approach saved more than $200 million. [TheWrap] [Variety]

Principal photography lasted approximately 20 days. [TheWrap]

Hollywood Workers React To The Production

The movie generated immediate criticism when its production method was revealed in April 2026. TheWrap described the response from portions of the Hollywood community as a mixture of anger, fear and skepticism over what the technology could mean for employment. [TheWrap]

The controversy came during widespread concern about AI replacing film-production jobs. Writers, actors, visual-effects artists, designers and other entertainment workers have pushed for contractual protections governing synthetic performances and AI-generated creative work.

The film attracted particular attention because some traditional production departments were reduced or unnecessary under its workflow. The production did not use conventional sets or a traditional on-set lighting department in the way a major globe-spanning movie normally would. [TheWrap]

Producers Say The Film Still Employed Hundreds Of People

The filmmakers have rejected claims that the production eliminated human filmmaking. Producers told TheWrap that Bitcoin employed 107 cast members, approximately 100 shooting crew members and 54 additional crew members. [TheWrap]

Post-production was expected to employ approximately 55 AI artists. [TheWrap]

Producer Lawrence Grey said human artists remained necessary throughout the process. The filmmakers have characterized AI as another production tool rather than an autonomous system creating the film without human direction. [TheWrap]

Production Designer Says Humans Designed The Sets First

Production designer Oliver Scholl said his department began with conventional design work. Artists produced drawings, renderings and 3D models before those materials were incorporated into the AI workflow. [TheWrap]

Scholl said AI outputs were based on images created by the production team rather than simple text prompts. He described the process as more controlled than asking a consumer image generator to independently invent a scene. [TheWrap]

Cinematographer Henry Braham also remained involved in designing how scenes were lit. The finished lighting was then generated or modified using the production’s AI system. [TheWrap]

Casey Affleck Also Defends The Process

Casey Affleck said Doug Liman’s involvement persuaded him to participate. He described both Bitcoin and artificial intelligence as disruptive technologies and said that connection appealed to him creatively. [TheWrap]

Affleck said acting on the mostly empty soundstage felt similar to performing in theater. He said the minimal physical environment allowed the production to focus heavily on the actors’ performances. [TheWrap]

The Actors’ Performances Are Supposed To Remain Live Action

Producers say the finished movie will preserve the actors as they were actually photographed. Kavanaugh told TheWrap that the performances themselves would not be replaced by generated versions. [TheWrap]

Actors wore the costumes visible in the finished movie and received conventional hair and makeup work. Affleck also used physical prosthetics for his role. [TheWrap]

Gadot Calls The Process A Form Of Filmmaking

Gadot said working inside the stripped-down environment placed unusual emphasis on imagination and performance. She described the experience positively while acknowledging her continuing concerns about AI. [Variety]

She said she was trying to learn how the technology could be used while protecting human performers from being digitally altered. [TheWrap]

The Movie Was Originally Called Bitcoin: Killing Satoshi

The project was publicly introduced as Bitcoin: Killing Satoshi. The title was later shortened to Bitcoin. [TheWrap]

Doug Liman directed the film. His previous credits include The Bourne Identity, Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Edge of Tomorrow and Road House.

The cast includes Gal Gadot, Casey Affleck, Pete Davidson and Isla Fisher. [TheWrap]

The Story Centers On The Identity Of Bitcoin Creator Satoshi Nakamoto

The thriller concerns the mystery surrounding Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto. Satoshi is the pseudonym used by the unidentified person or group that developed Bitcoin.

Gadot plays a war correspondent named Lotte. She is recruited to investigate Craig Wright, who is played by Casey Affleck. [TheWrap]

Pete Davidson plays cryptocurrency entrepreneur Calvin Ayre. [TheWrap]

Craig Wright’s Satoshi Claim Has Been Rejected By A British Court

The movie uses Craig Wright’s disputed claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto as a major part of its storyline. Wright spent years publicly asserting that he invented Bitcoin.

A British court ruled in 2024 that Wright was not Satoshi Nakamoto. Judge James Mellor found overwhelming evidence that Wright had repeatedly lied and forged documents in support of the claim. [Reuters]

The filmmakers describe Bitcoin as a fictionalized conspiracy thriller rather than a documentary. [TheWrap]

The Movie Was Taken To Cannes

The producers brought Bitcoin to the Cannes film market in May 2026 to seek international distribution. [El País]

The film was marketed at Cannes rather than competing in the festival’s main competition. [El País]

Cannes Officials Express Concern About AI And Creative Labor

Cannes general delegate Thierry Frémaux addressed artificial intelligence before the 2026 festival. He said the festival stood with artists, screenwriters, actors and voice performers whose work could be negatively affected by AI. [El País]

Frémaux also said legislation was needed to address the technology. [El País]

Cannes prohibited films using AI in their creative process from competing, while the festival’s commercial film market remained open to AI-assisted projects such as Bitcoin. [El País]

Acme AI & FX Was Created Around The Production

The film is produced by Acme AI & FX, a company founded by Ryan Kavanaugh, Matt Kavanaugh, Garrett Grant and Lawrence Grey. [TheWrap]

Doug Liman’s AI company 30 Ninjas also worked on the movie. [TheWrap]

Acme says it has additional AI-assisted film projects in development. The company has described Bitcoin as a proof of concept for a production model it hopes to use on future movies. [TheWrap]

The Film Has Become A Test Case For AI In Hollywood

The dispute surrounding Gadot and Bitcoin reflects a larger Hollywood debate over how AI should be used in filmmaking. The controversy involves not only whether artificial intelligence can create convincing images but also what happens to traditional production jobs when physical sets, locations and portions of lighting or visual-effects work can be generated computationally.

Gadot’s own response illustrates that tension. She has publicly said she fears AI and insisted that her acting be contractually protected from it, while simultaneously arguing that rejecting the technology altogether is no longer a realistic option for people working in the film industry. [Variety] [TheWrap]