The AI Actress Tilly Norwood: She’s Not Art, She Represents Data.
The threat to human creativity from technology advanced another step this week through the introduction of Tilly Norwood, the inaugural fully AI-created actor. As expected, her unveiling at the Zurich film festival via a light-hearted piece named AI Commissioner sparked controversy. Emily Blunt labeled the movie “terrifying” and Sag-Aftra, the actors' guild, criticized it as “jeopardising performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry”.
Many concerns arise with Norwood, including the implications of her “girl-next-door” image for young women. However, the deeper issue involves her facial features being derived from actual performers lacking their awareness or approval. Her cheerful introduction conceals the reality that she embodies an innovative system for producing media that ignores traditional standards and legal frameworks overseeing artists and their creations.
Hollywood has been anticipating Norwood’s arrival for some time. Movies like the 2002 science fiction film Simone, about a film director who creates the perfect actress on a computer, and 2013’s The Congress, featuring a veteran star being digitally captured by her production company, proved strikingly prophetic. 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 originator, the actress and scribe Eline Van der Velden supported her by saying she is “not taking a human's place”, but “a piece of art”, portraying AI as a fresh instrument, similar to a brush. Based on proponents' views, 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. There wasn’t always an Oscar for visual effects, after all. Plus, AI is already integrated into cinema, primarily in cartoon and sci-fi types. Two of last year’s Oscar-winning films – The Brutalist and Emilia Perez – utilized artificial intelligence to refine voices. Late actors like Carrie Fisher have been brought back for roles after their passing.
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 2023 screenwriters' strike in Hollywood led to a limited win resisting the deployment of artificial intelligence. And although top stars' opinions on Norwood have received broad coverage, typically it is the less powerful individuals whose employment is most endangered – extras and vocal performers, cosmetic experts and crew members.
AI thespians are a sure result of a world saturated with online trash, surgical enhancements and falsehood. 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 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, currently, anyway, that doesn’t mean there is nothing to fear. Laws are sluggish and awkward, even as tech evolves rapidly. Additional actions are required to safeguard actors and production teams, and the worth of human inventiveness.