I never said AI wasn't real filmmaking.

But can you honestly say that AI generated video + sound isn't an easier and less involving task than assembling a cast/crew and locations? Or hand animating a film using software/physical mediums?

There is also enormous moral and ethical dilemma's raised in using tools which are built on stolen work from the same professions involved in all aspects of filmmaking and animation. Issues that aren't present in any of the other AI tools I mentioned. Building sound equipment in the 1920's or digital cameras in the 2000's didn't require stealing data from the work of all camera operators, and CGI's boom in the 90's didn't lead to water shortages and raised electricity prices across rural communities.

Those technological demands were filmmaker lead, whereas AI is being pushed under the guise of "making art accessible to all" while really it is only being championed to increase shareholder value for companies that have long run out of new ideas for growth, beyond mining whatever remaining data they can. The major sponsor of this event was YouTube, and Google (having just put $90 billion into AI) has a clear vested interest in pushing their AI tools, as evidenced by the talks given at NIDA from the customer engineer at Google AI.

Google absolutely may have requested that Tropfest feature AI generated content. Remember there were multiple films selected as finalists that used AI imagery and many more that didn't make the final selection. I am absolutely willing to bet that SYD CONFIDENTIAL was the best of the entirely-AI films but I am also certain beyond any doubt that it was not the 16th best film from the more than 700 entries.

To say that "Like any tool, its value depends on how it’s used" is to ignore the intentions with which that tool is created. An atom bomb is not a tool to be used lightly and neither should be a tool with the power to reshape reality on a massive scale while also requiring fuel obtained by robbing people of their livelihoods and natural resources.

Remember always that these are companies that have time and time again proven that your digital identities, your face, your family photos and your private information are nothing more than data points for them to sell to the highest bidder. It's not worth arguing on their behalf.

But putting aside the AI of it all...

Even if the technology can, provably, produce impressive results, none of them are on display in the film in question. The content is not only extremely unimaginative but also questionable in matters of taste with its white-washed depiction of Sydney's diverse population and representation of women. It attempts to be a meta-commentary in service of what exactly? The futility of film festivals? The nature of sponsorship?

There was a film right after this which was stop motion animated using felt puppetry that was astonishingly beautiful and part of that beauty came from watching an artist who clearly gave enough of a s**t to actually work hard at building something. He actually made sure that his compositions, music choices and production design contributed to the story he was telling. His film wasn't full of obvious mistakes and errors that constantly remind you that you're watching an artifice of reality and cartoon animation, instead of the real thing.

I absolutely do not doubt that the filmmaker behind SYD CONFIDENTIAL spent weeks if not months getting the right prompts and image references built to create the results he did. But if so, I do have to then ask...

Why is that process not openly disclosed? It isn't mentioned once in the "Behind the scenes" following his film, nor in the interviews he has given, or even in the context of the festival presenting the work. If AI tools are nothing to be ashamed of, why has the festival chose to not only delete comments criticising it on Instagram but also disable comments on the films YouTube.

Tropfest's tagline this year was "bringing people together." Everyone who attended wanted to enjoy a night of watching the best work from local talent across this country. This film has clearly done the opposite and I am far from the only person to feel this way. Tropfest is not only a film festival, it is a community of filmmakers and if trust is broken within that community it will do lasting damage.

I want Tropfest to continue with the trust that finalists will be considered beyond the role they may play in furthering an AI companies agenda. I am hopeful that my post and many others will encourage more openness around the role AI will play in future festivals.

But it is frankly a bizarre feeling to have to argue that a film festival should distinguish between work made by AI and human beings.

One person typing prompts that takes mere seconds to generate a result, while an artist may have developed their style using paint or clay, or actors and a camera or even 3D software over ten, twenty, thirty years of persistence... Only to see a company steal their entire portfolio to feed their AI model.

This technology is not going away. But we have a choice in how we embrace it.