Tropfest or Slopfest?

Written by Matthew Donlan

AI is a vampire. It drains the life from its victims to sustain its own. It can be shiny and sexy like the vampires in True Blood or ugly and unsettling like Nosferatu. It scares away many when it reveals its hand but plays mind games to entice you near. “AI is here to stay” says its supporters. But like a vampire, it must be invited in first.

The pathetic fallacy was there when black storm clouds and white lightning rolled their way closer to Centennial Park. Like a harbinger of what was to come. The state of the industry summarised in one weather event. 

Tropfest decided to open the door and say ‘come inside’ to AI at last night’s event. After seven years away, Tropfest’s return was a big deal. Amidst years of conversations about the collapsing industry, the concentrating of media power and insurmountable hurdles for newcomers, Tropfest’s comeback heralded a change, or at least a return to the nicer days. The festival, in its history, had come to represent the democratisation of the art. A chance for anyone to make it big and kickstart their career. It turned unknown names into industry heavyweights. A $50,000 prize money for the top award is insane money for an early-career filmmaker. It not only opens the door but kicks it down, crushes it and makes a decorative bowl out of it. 

At last night’s event, attended by thousands of people, one film stood out. Sydney Confidential credits only one name in the entire cast and crew. Either this filmmaker is the pinnacle of the slashie title, acting as voice talent, writer, editor and animator. Or, a few hours were spent honing the craft of ‘prompt-writer’ to finesse the AI-generated short film. The spelling errors, geographical anomalies and perpetual symmetry are either strokes of subversive comedic genius, or evidence that this was sloppily put together by a machine. I fear to err on the latter.

It shouldn’t be a shock that an AI-film was submitted to Tropfest. But it is a shock that out of 700 entries, this was deemed worthy of the top 16. Many of my friends submitted short films to Tropfest. Many of them were amongst the shortlisted films. All of them were made with real people, with intentionality, with real stories driving them and with a desire to create and celebrate art. That’s perhaps the part that hurt the most. It felt like a promise had been broken by screening an AI film. Expectations were shattered. And for many young filmmakers it was a slap in the face. Another example that no matter how hard they try, something else will replace them.

The question I keep wondering is how an AI film made it that far. One possibility is that the deciding panel didn’t know that the film submitted was AI. Do they not know how to recognise the use of AI in film? According to Tropfest’s Q+A section, filmmakers needed to declare the use of AI which would be passed on to the judges. They say that “what matters most to us is transparency and that the filmmaker plays a meaningful creative role.” They say that an AI-only category is something they may consider in the future. So the panel surely knew?

Another possibility is, perhaps, it was maliciously included. In this hyper-ephemeral, chase-the-zeitgeist, stoke-conversation-through-controversy internet discourse, the inclusion of a controversial generative tool would guarantee sustained coverage and clicks. If that’s the case, then well done because I took the bait. Or, only one step up from that hell of cynicism is the possibility that it was included to normalise its presence in the industry. To sway a few people on the fence with its very-Sydney humour and hope they look past the yellow-tinged graphics and sloppy errors. Tropfest claim they are “future-facing” and “embrace new tools.” I feel like its inclusion was a pilot experiment. To gauge reception and decide accordingly. Where they failed though was by not listening to their own guidelines. “What matters most to us is transparency.” So why was that same transparency not afforded to the audience?

Perhaps this is the Faustian price Tropfest had to pay by going to bed with Commbank, YouTube, Qantas, Nine, Chery, Pandora, Sony, Scape, Fraser Suites, NIDA and the NSW Government. The Commbank bicycles and blankets. The YouTube ferris wheel. The Archie Rose bar. Even a Fiji water bottle in the toilets. Their presence too, just like the AI, represented a change in Tropfest’s goal. It’s no longer the freely accessible scrappy-make-do DIY film festival. It’s the corporate-sponsored, big-money-board, technology-first festival. If this is the Tropfest we have now, I’d rather the memory of what it used to be.

As of writing (Monday 23 Feb 5pm) the YouTube comments on the offending short film are rife with complaints about the use of AI. Every time AI is used, it needs to be called out. If we are to protect creative jobs, we need to speak out on it. What is disheartening is that over on Instagram, comments complaining about it seem to keep disappearing. A sign of damage control or skirting accountability? If Tropfest were serious about supporting filmmakers they would let those comments stay, own up to what happened and explain how they’ll do better. If the situation changes, I’ll update this piece with a note.

I walked into that space like an excitable puppy and walked home with the same question I’ve been asking myself for the past few weeks. Did I make a mistake entering the film industry?

 The good faith of Tropfest was washed away last night, like tears in the rain.