OMNI AI Film Festival founders: 8 critical questions about ethics

OMNI AI Film Festival, a new film competition showcasing only AI generated films, will have its inaugural festival in Sydney this November.

Following this announcement, ScreenHub spoke to OMNI founders Aryeh Sternberg and Travis Rice for a Q and A about the ethics of AI filmmaking, and why George Miller decided to join the judging panel.

Answers have been edited for clarity.

Why do you think the world needs a film festival dedicated exclusively to AI-generated films right now?

Travis Rice: Film and cinema have existed for a very long time and will continue to; drawing a line around showcasing only AI-generated films means we can see these works on their own merit. We are exploring this by highlighting the very top edge of the deep and wide (and sometimes dark) pool of generative content that is actively being shared widely on the internet. We are focused on showcasing and sharing only quality stories, and they do exist. 

Our film program is intentionally only presented in person, bringing people together to have a shared experience and dialogue. The concept of holding up a mirror to these advances in generative AI is core to our direction and for audiences to reflect on the value of their own attention.

At OMNI, we are not saying AI is the best way; we are saying AI is ONE WAY. 

We are exploring this by highlighting the very top edge of the deep and wide (and sometimes dark) pool of generative content

Do you see OMNI as pushing towards a future where AI films compete directly with human-made films in mainstream festivals? How does that future make you feel?

Aryeh Sternberg: The OMNI AI Film Festival was created to fill a distinct gap in the global festival landscape. While a few festivals have begun to accept AI-assisted films, none were dedicated exclusively to generative AI filmmaking. We launched OMNI with a clear focus and a clear boundary: submissions must be composed of at least 90% generative AI, whether in scripting, image generation, video, sound design, music, voice, or any other component of the production process.

During OMNI 0.5, we received a range of submissions, including some entirely traditional, beautifully filmed analog movies that used no AI whatsoever. While we appreciated the artistry, we had to respectfully decline those entries. They simply didn’t align with the core purpose of OMNI: to explore and showcase what’s possible through generative tools.

Today, many festivals are beginning to offer ‘AI categories,’ but often without fully defining what that entails. This creates confusion among entrants and audiences alike. At OMNI, we are crystal clear in our criteria and proud to champion a new category of cinematic creation.

We’re adding AI as an option and building a platform for filmmakers who are pioneering entirely new workflows. And while the tools are different, the standard remains the same: high-quality, emotionally resonant storytelling.

Submissions must be composed of at least 90% generative AI, whether in scripting, image generation, video, sound design, music, voice, or any other component of the production process.

You’ve framed AI as ‘the next frontier of storytelling’. What do you say to filmmakers who view it as a shortcut or a compromise rather than an evolution?

Sternberg: The challenge with how traditional filmmakers talk about AI filmmaking is the assumption that it’s a shortcut. But there are no shortcuts when it comes to producing high-quality stories with generative film; it’s simply a different workflow. It still requires a deep understanding of the craft of filmmaking and storytelling, plus additional skills and expertise that don’t exist in traditional production.

Creating effective prompts and guiding an AI engine demands comprehensive knowledge of everything that goes into building a cinematic moment. You’re not just generating visuals; you’re directing, designing, and editing in fragmented, one-to-5-second increments. Unlike shooting with a camera, where continuity and control are built into the process, generative filmmaking requires you to construct cohesion manually and deliberately.

Storytelling becomes even more critical in this space. You have to imagine and shape the emotional arc frame by frame, without the fluidity of live action. So while the tools may be different, the creativity and the labor involved are intensive. It’s not about cutting corners.

Creating effective prompts and guiding an AI engine demands comprehensive knowledge of everything that goes into building a cinematic moment.

You say all entries are tested for plagiarism. How, specifically, do you check that an AI model hasn’t trained on copyrighted works?

Sternberg: This is an important question as detecting plagiarism in generative film is a complex task. What exactly constitutes plagiarism in this context? Are we talking about visual content, source material, narrative structure, characters, names, or locations? And where do we draw the line between inspiration, homage, parody, and outright infringement? It’s a moving dynamic.

For our OMNI Festival, filmmakers assert their creative rights and ownership when submitting the film, granting OMNI exhibition rights for a small number of live screenings. We also ask that the filmmaker explicitly state the tools used to create these works, tools such as Runway, Kling or Moon Valley. Broadly, we avoid content that showcases the explicit use of copyrighted or unoriginal materials, such as directly copying people’s likenesses, recognisable locations, or film footage, or using cut-and-paste elements from existing media. This type of content is not compelling and only represents a tiny fraction of our entries and none of our award winners.

Current copyright laws on AI content, both nationally and internationally, are still evolving and often leave a great deal of ambiguity around generative content. We are watching this space carefully and hope to provide a lens for social understanding, education and further dialogue.

Do you think a festival can legitimately police ethical use of AI when even government regulators are struggling to do so?

Sternberg: In our view it’s an ongoing challenge. The role of a film festival is to promote quality film in an aware and responsible manner. Our responsibility is to evaluate the creative and technical quality of the films submitted based on the criteria we’ve clearly set out in our admission guidelines. We’re not a regulatory body or a legal authority. We’re a platform for showcasing the best creativity in a rapidly evolving medium: generative cinema.

That said, we take the legal landscape seriously. We remain in close contact with organisations like the Copyright Agency and follow developments in copyright law and content regulation. Where the lines are clearly drawn, such as in cases of copyright infringement, we act accordingly.

How do you judge ‘authorship’ in a film created with prompts and datasets rather than cameras and crews?

Sternberg: We’ve seen this kind of shift before: from typewriters to word processors, from static grammar rules to adaptive suggestions powered by tools like Grammarly. Each leap forward introduced new capabilities, but none removed the need for a human voice, a clear purpose, or a creative decision-maker.

The same applies to generative filmmaking. Yes, it’s a new workflow, but it’s still filmmaking.

Every OMNI submission must include a breakdown of the platforms and tools used, not just to verify that generative methods were involved, but to contribute to the collective knowledge of the community. We want creators to learn from each other, challenge each other, and ultimately raise the bar for what this new medium can achieve.

Why did you approach George Miller to join the judging panel, and what do you think his involvement signals to the industry?

Rice: Earlier this year, Yan Chen, one of the judges from OMNI 0.5, showed George some of the films that were submitted for the first test screening. From my understanding, it sounds as if he was very surprised by the quality and consistency. He expressed real interest in how far generative filmmaking had come and in joining the festival dialogue, and may be exploring this as a serious new tool in visual storytelling.

In five years, what does success look like for OMNI?

Rice: Over the next five years, we know the filmmaking landscape will continue to shift. OMNI’s role is to provide a platform that highlights quality in this field, where that evolution and its social value can be seen and discussed by audiences, creators, industry leaders, and skeptics alike.

The real, human and emotional element of storytelling is crucial to film and will be for a very long time.

---

ScreenHub: George Miller will judge AI generated films at inaugural OMNI festival

---

Discover more screen, games & arts news and reviews on ScreenHub and ArtsHub. Sign up for our free ArtsHub and ScreenHub newsletters.