back to top
HomeTechThe $500K AI Film That 'Premiered at Cannes' Didn't Actually Premiere at...

The $500K AI Film That ‘Premiered at Cannes’ Didn’t Actually Premiere at Cannes

- Advertisement -

Last week an AI startup called Higgsfield announced it had premiered a fully AI-generated feature film at Cannes. The Wall Street Journal covered it. The founder posted on LinkedIn that “for decades, Cannes has been the room where new cinema gets legitimized.” The story spread fast.

There was one problem. Cannes said it never happened.

According to Futurism, which reached out to festival organizers directly after failing to find the film on the official Cannes schedule, a festival spokesperson confirmed that “Hell Grind was not screened as part of the official Festival de Cannes program.” The film was presented during an industry event organized by third parties in Cannes. That’s a meaningfully different thing and the distinction matters because the entire credibility of the announcement rested on the Cannes name.

It’s a clean example of how AI hype gets manufactured and how quickly it travels before anyone checks.

What Hell Grind actually is

Higgsfield, a San Francisco startup valued at $1.3 billion, made a 95-minute action film called Hell Grind in two weeks using AI video generation tools including Google’s Veo 3. Total cost was $500,000. Of that, $400,000 went to compute costs, which tells you something about where AI filmmaking economics currently sit.

The film follows four street thieves whose heist goes wrong when an ancient artifact pulls one of them into the underworld. It’s campy, action-heavy, and exactly the kind of spectacle you’d expect from a proof-of-concept designed to sell Hollywood studios on AI video tools rather than win awards.

The technical process was more involved than the “just prompt an AI” framing suggests. Each prompt averaged 3,000 words. Every generation produced about 15 seconds of footage which then had to be generated multiple times with tweaks to get a usable shot. The first 25 minutes of the film required 16,181 initial video generations that became 253 final shots. Maintaining visual consistency across a feature-length film is genuinely hard with current AI tools and the team had to build detailed style prefixes into every prompt defining lighting, camera type, physics behavior, and more to avoid the over-lit artificial look that gets dismissed as slop.

“You can’t go into AI and say make me a 95-minute cool video,” said Adil Alimzhanov, a content lead at Higgsfield. That’s honest and worth crediting. The work was there even if the marketing around it wasn’t.

How the Cannes claim fell apart

The venue where Hell Grind screened was the Marché du Film, which has a business relationship with the Cannes Film Festival but operates as a separate commercial marketplace with no meaningful selection process. It will screen any film that pays the fee. It has screened Sharknado. Calling it a Cannes premiere is roughly equivalent to buying an ad in the New York Times and describing yourself as a Times journalist.

When Higgsfield’s founder posted on LinkedIn implying the film had premiered at Cannes proper, a director named John Washburn replied directly. “This isn’t screening at the Festival de Cannes, which is what you’re implying. The suggestion that paying for a screening at some random theatre in the same town and at the same time as a major festival is somehow the same thing as being selected by that festival is misleading at best. Spurious bullshittery, really.”

Higgsfield later defended itself by saying the Marché du Film was an accredited component of the Cannes ecosystem. That’s technically true in the same way that a hotel gift shop is part of the hotel ecosystem. The Wall Street Journal’s original article made no mention of the Marché du Film and left readers with the clear impression the film was part of the festival proper. The paper later added a correction at the bottom of its original story clarifying the film screened at the Marché du Film, not the official festival program.

The pattern this fits into

Hell Grind isn’t an isolated case. It’s a chapter in a longer story about how AI companies build credibility through association.

Earlier this year a video of Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt fighting on a rooftop went viral for its apparent AI-generated quality, with people declaring it proof that Hollywood was finished. It turned out to be an AI reskin of existing footage of two human performers in front of a green screen. The underlying capability was real but the demonstration was theater.

The Cannes situation follows the same structure. The underlying capability is real. Higgsfield did make a feature-length AI film and the technical challenges they solved are genuine. But the claim that it premiered at Cannes was designed to attach prestige that the work hadn’t earned through the process that prestige is supposed to represent.

Demi Moore said at the festival that AI is here and fighting it is a battle that will be lost. Tilda Swinton said AI doesn’t have a chance. Guillermo Del Toro said something considerably more direct to thunderous applause. The debate at Cannes was real and substantive. Hell Grind was adjacent to it geographically and nowhere near it in terms of what the festival actually validated.

The $500K budget and two-week production timeline are striking numbers if they’re accurate. Given the marketing around the screening it’s reasonable to hold them loosely until independently verified.


Want more stories worth your time?

Add us to your Google favorites. We cover the tech stories, AI developments, and open-source projects that are easy to miss in the noise.

Add as a preferred source on Google

Don’t miss any Tech Story

Subscribe To Firethering NewsLetter

You Can Unsubscribe Anytime! Read more in our privacy policy

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
Can Twitter.now Survive The New Twitter Faces a Bigger Problem Than X

Can Twitter.now Survive? The New Twitter Faces a Bigger Problem Than X

0
The bird is back. After Elon Musk turned Twitter into X, a startup called Operation Bluebird has now launched Twitter.now using the Twitter name, the familiar bird, and an ambitious promise to build a new kind of public square. But this isn't really about bringing back an old brand. Twitter.now says it wants to build something different: a social network centered on trust, transparency, and user choice, where people can decide how much reach different posts deserve instead of leaving everything to an opaque algorithm. Early access costs $20, and the platform is already offering founding members the chance to claim handles and even become Founder #00001. The question, though, isn't whether Twitter.now can bring back the name. It's whether it can bring back the people. Because in social media, having the right name is one thing. Convincing millions of people to leave an established network, rebuild their communities somewhere else, and give a tiny new platform a reason to exist is an entirely different game. And that's where its actual challenge begins.
A Bluetooth Glitch Just Exposed How AliExpress Fingerprints Vistors' Browsers Through Audio

A Bluetooth Glitch Just Exposed How AliExpress Fingerprints Vistors’ Browsers Through Audio

0
Your headphones can tell you when a website is doing something strange. At least, that's what happened when a developer noticed his Bluetooth headphones stopped switching back to his phone whenever an AliExpress tab was open on his PC. There was no music playing from the computer. No video. No audible sound. Closing the AliExpress tab immediately fixed the problem. That strange Bluetooth glitch led him to something much more interesting: AliExpress was quietly running audio through the browser, not to listen to the user, but to measure how the browser and device processed a known sound. The technique is called Web Audio fingerprinting. And while it sounds like something from an older era of browser tracking, the discovery shows just how much information a website can extract from seemingly ordinary browser APIs. Brave later highlighted the case, explaining that AliExpress wasn't recording users' audio. Instead, it was generating a silent signal and measuring how a device processed it to help fingerprint the browser. So what exactly was happening inside that supposedly silent AliExpress tab and why did a fingerprinting technique end up interfering with a pair of Bluetooth headphones?
Inside Sam Altman’s High-Stakes Gamble to Save OpenAI’s Dominance

“Mostly My Fault”: Inside Sam Altman’s High-Stakes Gamble to Save OpenAI’s Dominance

0
It’s been a little over a month since Sam Altman admitted something you don't often hear from the CEO of the company that helped kick off the generative AI boom. “We did not have our best last 12 months ever, which is mostly my fault.” Then he raised the stakes. Altman said OpenAI is about to have its best 12 months to date. A month later, that promise is worth looking at more closely because OpenAI isn't simply trying to release a better model. It's spending enormous amounts of money on compute, pushing deeper into AI agents and products, competing with increasingly capable rivals, and making bets on infrastructure that could shape how the company operates for years. So what changed? And more importantly, what exactly is Altman betting on to turn a year he largely blames himself for into OpenAI's best one yet?