Lionsgate's AI Chief Explains the Studio's New Tech Job
Kathleen Grace’s role shows how Hollywood is moving from experimental AI deals to internal governance, workflow testing and executive accountability
Lionsgate has become one of the clearest examples of how Hollywood is professionalizing its AI strategy. In a May 1 interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Kathleen Grace, the studio’s chief AI officer, described what it actually means to bring artificial intelligence into an old-line entertainment company without blowing up the relationships that make the company function.
That distinction matters. For much of the past two years, AI in Hollywood has been discussed through the language of disruption: synthetic actors, scraped datasets, instant video generation and jobs at risk. Lionsgate’s approach, at least publicly, is more operational. The studio is not presenting AI as a replacement for filmmaking. It is trying to define where the tools fit, who approves their use and how they interact with existing creative and legal structures.
Grace’s role is significant because it turns AI from a side conversation into an executive function. Studios have long had technology groups, innovation teams and digital strategy executives. A chief AI officer is different. It signals that the company sees AI as a cross-departmental issue touching development, production, post, marketing, legal and finance simultaneously.
That is where the Hollywood AI conversation is heading. The most difficult questions are no longer simply whether a tool can generate a shot or clean up a line of dialogue. They are questions of governance: who owns the output, what data was used, whether talent consent is required, how workflows are documented and whether vendors are compliant with studio policy.
Lionsgate was early to the studio-AI conversation through its partnership with Runway, announced in 2024, to explore a custom model trained on the studio’s library. That deal made the company a test case for how studios might use their own catalogs as AI fuel. It also exposed the complexity of turning a press-friendly AI agreement into practical production infrastructure.
Grace’s job now appears to be less about splashy announcements than discipline. The studio needs to evaluate tools, manage risk and identify areas where AI can create efficiencies without triggering creative or labor backlash. In practice, that likely means starting with lower-risk areas: marketing mockups, internal visualization, catalog workflows and post-production support.
For Hollywood, the lesson is that AI adoption will not be handled by one deal or one product. It will require internal systems, executive oversight and a vocabulary that creative teams can trust. The companies that move fastest will not necessarily be the ones that chase the most aggressive tools. They may be the ones that build the clearest rules.
The emergence of roles like Grace’s suggests the industry is entering a less theatrical phase of AI adoption. The panic is not gone, but the work is becoming more bureaucratic. That may sound dull. In Hollywood, it is often how a technology becomes permanent.