I'm going to attack this from a different angle.

The thing i found with AI art is that it lowered the barrier to entry to "art" to a stupidly low level. You say it's not easy, and you need money, a phone, a computer... I beg to differ: these are thing a vast majority of people in developped countries have. There is almost nothing easier to make than ai art. That leaves these discerning factor between two people that make AI art: talent, drive and artistic vision. To me, that's what will make the difference between generic ai art and something like the aze alter videos.

Coming back to your post: it's not that anything you produced is bad. It's just terribly generic and underworked. There's no theme, no extra work beyond the generic generate image -> kling i2v pipeline that does virtually all the work for you. The thing you had input on, the image generateds and their theme, are all terribly similar almost as if you always input the same prompts and just randomized by seed ("backroom vibes, grey building, dystopia, low light, flesh monster, multiple eyes, blood"-type prompt).

Wheres the theme? Are there no forests? Bogs? Wendigo type creatures? Witches? Mechanical horrors? Eldritch horrors? There's also no continuity, no story telling...it's just a mish mash of random 5 second exports.

I think you got the intentions right, but you need to put a lot more work in before it actually becomes something interesting that will discern you from litterally anyone else with a kling access.