The AI Actress Tilly Norwood: She’s Not Art, She Represents Data.
The risk technology poses to human creative expression moved a step nearer this week with the appearance of Tilly Norwood, the inaugural fully AI-created actor. Unsurprisingly, her launch during the Zurich cinematic gathering within a humorous short titled AI Commissioner provoked strong reactions. Emily Blunt described the film as “terrifying” while the performers' union Sag-Aftra denounced it for “endangering actors' incomes and undermining human artistic value”.
Numerous issues surround Norwood, not least the message her “girl-next-door vibe” sends to young women. However, the deeper issue is the construction of her face using real actors' likenesses without their knowledge or consent. Her cheerful introduction conceals the reality that she embodies an innovative system for producing media that rides roughshod over longstanding norms and laws regulating creators and their output.
Tinseltown has foreseen Norwood's debut for years. Features including the 2002 sci-fi tale Simone, depicting a director who designs an ideal actress digitally, and 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, featuring Demi Moore as a declining famous person who creates a younger replica, similarly satirised the industry’s obsession with youth and beauty. Now, Victor Frankenstein-like, the film world is staring the “perfect actress” in the face.
Norwood's originator, the actress and scribe Eline Van der Velden justified her as “not a substitute for a real person”, but “a piece of art”, characterizing artificial intelligence as a novel tool, akin to painting equipment. According to its advocates, artificial intelligence will open up film production, as all individuals can create films without major studio backing.
From the Gutenberg press to talkies and TV, every artistic upheaval has faced fear and criticism. An Oscar for visual effects wasn't always available, remember. Plus, AI is already integrated into cinema, 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, along with the idea of AI performers reducing production expenses drastically, film industry staff have valid reasons for worry. The 2023 Hollywood writers’ strike resulted in a partial victory opposing the application of AI. And even as leading celebrities' thoughts on Norwood are well-documented, typically it is the less powerful individuals whose employment is most endangered – extras and vocal performers, cosmetic experts and crew members.
Digital performers are a natural outcome of a society flooded with social media junk, plastic surgery and deceit. At present, Norwood is unable to act or communicate. She lacks empathy, since, obviously, she isn't human. She isn't “art” as well; she is pure information. The genuine enchantment of films lies in human connection, and that is impossible to fabricate artificially. We enjoy cinema to witness truthful characters in real places, expressing true sentiments. 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 isn't to say there are no threats. Regulations are delayed and cumbersome, even as tech evolves rapidly. Additional actions are required to safeguard actors and production teams, and the value of human creativity.
