FT: The future of AI | Benny Box - Danish Motion Design Studio.

Financial Times

AI is here. Now What?

Client

Financial Times

Industry

Editorial & Journalism

Services

Storytelling
Motion Design
Animation

Featured at

SXSW LONDON, London
(June 1, 2026)

Museum of Moving Images, New York
(June 18, 2026)

FT Weekend Festival, New York
(June 20, 2026)

Some projects arrive with a brief and a clear destination. This one arrived with a question and an open door. Financial Times approached us to create a short film that didn't explain AI, but asked something harder: now that it is here, what do we actually want to do with it?

The result is a three-minute opinion film fronted by FT AI Editor Madhumita Murgia, sitting somewhere between essay and visual experiment. From storyboarding to motion design, Benny Box was deeply involved at every stage of the process.

The intersection of human and machine

One of the film's central ideas is the blurring line between human and technology. Not just what AI does to us, but how we are already part of it, and how it is becoming part of us. That idea needed to live in the visuals as much as in the script.

The imagery moves between the utopian and the unsettling, between clean futures and stranger, more ambiguous places where the boundary between human and machine starts to dissolve. The goal was never to frighten or to reassure, but to sit honestly in the weird and genuinely open territory that the question deserves.

A question, not an answer

The film was never meant to resolve anything. It was built to hold a question open and make the audience feel the weight of it. That shaped every creative decision, from the structure of the script to the visual language around Madhumita's words. Rather than illustrating AI with familiar imagery, the team worked to find a visual world that could carry both the unease and the possibility of the subject at the same time.

Using AI to question AI

Part of the brief was to experiment with AI as a creative tool within the film itself. That created an interesting tension to navigate: how do you use the thing you are questioning without losing control of the argument? The answer was intention. AI was used where it could amplify the visual ideas, never where it would replace the thinking behind them. Every AI-generated element passed through the hands of a designer. The art direction stayed human throughout, which is precisely what the film argues for - taking control of how we want AI to work with us and for us.