Technology's challenge to human creativity took another step closer this week via the debut of the digital performer Tilly Norwood, the first 100% AI-generated actor. Predictably, her unveiling at the Zurich film festival within a humorous short titled AI Commissioner sparked controversy. The film was called “terrifying” by Emily Blunt and Sag-Aftra, the actors' guild, criticized it as “jeopardising performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry”.
There is much that is problematic about Norwood, not least the message her “girl-next-door vibe” sends to young women. However, the deeper issue is that her face has been made from those of real actors absent their permission or notification. Her cheerful introduction conceals the reality that she represents a fresh approach to media creation that ignores traditional standards and legal frameworks overseeing artists and their creations.
Hollywood has been anticipating Norwood’s arrival for some time. Features including the 2002 sci-fi tale Simone, depicting a director who designs an ideal actress digitally, and 2013’s The Congress, featuring a veteran star being digitally captured by her production company, 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. Currently, in a Frankenstein-esque turn, the movie industry confronts the “ideal actress”.
Norwood's originator, the actress and scribe Eline Van der Velden defended her as “not a replacement for a human being”, rather “an artistic creation”, portraying AI as a fresh instrument, similar to a brush. According to its advocates, artificial intelligence will open up film production, because anyone can produce movies absent a large studio's assets.
From the Gutenberg press to talkies and TV, all creative revolutions have been feared and reviled. An Oscar for visual effects wasn't always available, remember. 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 – The Brutalist along with Emilia Perez – utilized artificial intelligence to refine voices. Deceased performers such as Carrie Fisher have been revived for after-death appearances.
However, although some embrace these opportunities, and the potential for AI thespians to cut filming budgets significantly, employees in the cinematic field are rightly concerned. The 2023 Hollywood writers’ strike resulted in a partial victory opposing the application of AI. And while A-listers’ views on Norwood have been widely reported, as always it is less influential people whose jobs are most at risk – supporting and voice artists, beauticians and production staff.
AI thespians are a sure result of a world saturated with online trash, surgical enhancements and falsehood. Currently, Norwood cannot perform or engage. She lacks empathy, since, obviously, she isn't human. She is not “art” either; she is data. Real cinematic magic comes from human interaction, and that cannot be replicated by machines. We enjoy cinema to witness truthful characters in real places, expressing true sentiments. 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 isn't to say there are no threats. Legislation is slow and clunky, whereas technology progresses at a staggering pace. Additional actions are required to safeguard actors and production teams, and the worth of human inventiveness.
Lena Hoffmann is a seasoned journalist with a passion for uncovering stories that matter, specializing in German current affairs and digital media trends.
