Meet Tilly Norwood: She Isn't Art, She’s Data.
The threat to human creativity from technology took another step closer in recent days via the debut of this AI-generated actress, the first 100% AI-generated actor. Predictably, her unveiling at the Zurich film festival via a light-hearted piece named AI Commissioner sparked controversy. Emily Blunt described the film as “terrifying” while the performers' union Sag-Aftra denounced it as “jeopardising performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry”.
Many concerns arise with Norwood, especially the signal her “approachable” persona sends to female youth. However, the deeper issue is the construction of her face using real actors' likenesses without their knowledge or consent. Her playful premiere obscures the truth that she represents a fresh approach to media creation which disregards established conventions and regulations overseeing artists and their creations.
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, along with 2013's The Congress, in which an ageing star is digitally scanned by her studio, turned out to be incredibly forward-thinking. Last year's shocker The Substance, with Demi Moore as a fading star who generates a youthful duplicate, similarly satirised the industry’s obsession with youth and beauty. Today, much like Victor Frankenstein, cinema faces its “perfect actress”.
Norwood’s creator, the actor and writer Eline Van der Velden supported her by saying she is “not taking a human's place”, instead “a work of art”, portraying AI as a fresh instrument, similar to a brush. As per its supporters, AI will democratise film, as all individuals can create films without major studio backing.
Beginning with the printing press to audible movies and TV, every artistic upheaval has faced fear and criticism. There wasn’t always an Oscar for visual effects, after all. And AI is already part of film-making, primarily in cartoon and sci-fi types. A pair of last year's Academy Award-winning movies – Emilia Perez and The Brutalist – used AI to enhance voices. Dead actors including Carrie Fisher have been resurrected for posthumous cameos.
But while some welcome such possibilities, and the potential for AI thespians to cut filming budgets significantly, workers in the film industry are justifiably alarmed. The writers' strike of 2023 achieved a halfway success against the use of AI. And even as leading celebrities' thoughts on Norwood are well-documented, once again, it's the lesser-known workers whose positions are most threatened – background and voice actors, makeup artists and production teams.
AI actors are an inevitable product of a culture awash with social media slop, cosmetic surgery and fakery. As yet, Norwood can’t act or interact. She cannot relate emotionally, for, clearly, she is not a real being. She isn't “art” as well; she is pure information. Real cinematic magic comes from human interaction, and that cannot be replicated by machines. We view movies to observe actual individuals in authentic settings, experiencing genuine feelings. We do not want perfect vibes.
But while warnings that Norwood is a doe-eyed existential threat to the film industry might be exaggerated, at least for the moment, that isn't to say there are no threats. Laws are sluggish and awkward, whereas technology progresses at a staggering pace. Further measures are needed to defend artists and cinematic staff, and the value of human creativity.
