Tilly Norwood: She Is Not Artistic, She Is Data.
Technology's challenge to human creativity moved a step nearer this week via the debut of Tilly Norwood, the inaugural fully AI-created actor. As expected, her unveiling at the Zurich film festival in a comic sketch called AI Commissioner provoked strong reactions. Emily Blunt labeled the movie “terrifying” while the performers' union Sag-Aftra denounced 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. Yet the graver concern is that her face has been made from those of real actors lacking their awareness or approval. Her playful premiere obscures the truth that she embodies an innovative system for producing media which disregards established conventions and regulations regulating creators and their output.
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, where an aging celebrity undergoes digital replication by her studio, proved strikingly prophetic. Last year’s body horror 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”.
The maker of Norwood, performer and author Eline Van der Velden supported her by saying she is “not taking a human's place”, but “a piece of art”, describing AI as a new tool, like a paintbrush. According to its advocates, 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, 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 – The Brutalist along with Emilia Perez – employed AI to improve vocal qualities. Late actors like Carrie Fisher have been brought back for roles after their passing.
Yet, even as certain parties accept these prospects, and the potential for AI thespians to cut filming budgets significantly, film industry staff have valid reasons for worry. The writers' strike of 2023 achieved a halfway success opposing the application of AI. And while A-listers’ views on Norwood have been widely reported, once again, it's the lesser-known workers whose positions are most threatened – supporting and voice artists, beauticians and production staff.
Digital performers are a natural outcome of a society flooded with social media junk, plastic surgery and deceit. Currently, Norwood cannot perform or engage. She cannot relate emotionally, for, clearly, she is not a real being. She is not “art” either; she is data. Real cinematic magic comes from human interaction, and that is impossible to fabricate artificially. We view movies to observe actual individuals in authentic settings, experiencing genuine feelings. We do not want perfect vibes.
Yet, even if cautions about Norwood being a grave risk to movies are inflated, at least for the moment, that does not imply there is no reason for concern. 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.
