The AI Actress Tilly Norwood: She’s Not Art, She’s Data.
Technology's challenge to human creativity advanced another step in recent days with the appearance of Tilly Norwood, the first 100% AI-generated actor. As expected, her premiere at the Zurich film event within a humorous short titled AI Commissioner provoked strong reactions. Emily Blunt labeled the movie “terrifying” and the actors’ union Sag-Aftra condemned it for “endangering actors' incomes and undermining human artistic value”.
Many concerns arise with Norwood, especially the signal her “approachable” persona sends to female youth. Yet the graver concern is that her face has been made from those of real actors absent their permission or notification. Her lighthearted debut masks the fact that she is part of a new model of media production that ignores traditional standards and legal frameworks governing artists and their work.
Hollywood has been anticipating Norwood’s arrival for some time. Films such as the 2002 sci-fi Simone, centered on a filmmaker crafting a flawless actress via computer, and the 2013 production The Congress, in which an ageing star is digitally scanned by her studio, were remarkably prescient. Last year's shocker The Substance, with Demi Moore as a fading star who generates a youthful duplicate, also ridiculed Hollywood's preoccupation with young age and good looks. Today, much like Victor Frankenstein, cinema faces its “perfect actress”.
Norwood’s creator, the actor and writer Eline Van der Velden defended her as “not a replacement for a human being”, but “a piece of art”, describing AI as a new tool, like a paintbrush. As per its supporters, artificial intelligence will open up film production, because anyone can produce movies absent a large studio's assets.
Starting with the Gutenberg press through sound films and television, each innovative shift has been dreaded and denounced. An Oscar for visual effects wasn't always available, remember. And AI is already part of film-making, especially in animation and sci-fi genres. Two of last year’s Oscar-winning films – Emilia Perez and The Brutalist – employed AI to improve vocal qualities. Late actors like Carrie Fisher have been brought back for roles after their passing.
But while some welcome such possibilities, as well as the prospect of AI actors slashing production costs by 90%, employees in the cinematic field are rightly concerned. The 2023 screenwriters' strike in Hollywood led to a limited win resisting the deployment of artificial intelligence. And while A-listers’ views on Norwood have been widely reported, once again, it's the lesser-known workers whose positions are most threatened – background and voice actors, makeup artists and production teams.
Digital performers are a natural outcome of a society flooded with social media junk, plastic surgery and deceit. As yet, Norwood can’t act or interact. She can’t empathise, because, it hardly needs to be said, she is not a person. She isn't “art” as well; she is pure information. Real cinematic magic comes from human interaction, and that cannot be artificially generated. We watch films to see real people in real locations, feeling real emotions. We are not seeking ideal impressions.
But while warnings that Norwood is a doe-eyed existential threat to the film industry might be exaggerated, at least for the moment, that doesn’t mean there is nothing to fear. Laws are sluggish and awkward, whereas technology progresses at a staggering pace. Additional actions are required to safeguard actors and production teams, and the importance of human imaginative power.
