The threat to human creativity from technology took another step closer in recent days via the debut of Tilly Norwood, the inaugural fully AI-created actor. Unsurprisingly, her launch during the Zurich cinematic gathering via a light-hearted piece named AI Commissioner caused an outcry. Emily Blunt described the film as “terrifying” while the performers' union Sag-Aftra denounced it as “threatening artists' careers and cheapening human creativity”.
There is much that is problematic about Norwood, not least the message her “girl-next-door vibe” sends to young women. But the more serious point involves her facial features being derived from actual performers lacking their awareness or approval. Her playful premiere obscures the truth that she represents a fresh approach to media creation which disregards established conventions and regulations governing artists and their work.
Tinseltown has foreseen Norwood's debut for years. Movies like the 2002 science fiction film Simone, depicting a director who designs an ideal actress digitally, along with 2013's The Congress, in which an ageing star is digitally scanned by her studio, 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. Now, Victor Frankenstein-like, the film world is staring the “perfect actress” in the face.
The maker of Norwood, performer and author Eline Van der Velden justified her as “not a substitute for a real person”, instead “a work of art”, characterizing artificial intelligence as a novel tool, akin to painting equipment. Based on proponents' views, AI will democratise film, since everyone will be able to make movies without the resources of a big studio.
From the Gutenberg press to talkies and TV, all creative revolutions have been feared and reviled. The visual effects Oscar hasn't always existed, of course. Furthermore, artificial intelligence is already involved in movie production, primarily in cartoon and sci-fi types. A pair of last year's Academy Award-winning movies – The Brutalist along with Emilia Perez – used AI to enhance voices. Deceased performers such as Carrie Fisher have been revived for after-death appearances.
However, although some embrace these opportunities, as well as the prospect of AI actors slashing production costs by 90%, workers in the film industry are justifiably alarmed. The 2023 Hollywood writers’ strike resulted in a partial victory against the use of AI. And while A-listers’ views on Norwood have been widely reported, typically it is the less powerful individuals whose employment is most endangered – 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 lacks empathy, since, obviously, she isn't human. She is not “artistic” too; she is merely data. The genuine enchantment of films lies in human connection, and that cannot be artificially generated. We enjoy cinema to witness truthful characters in real places, expressing true sentiments. We don't desire flawless atmospheres.
But while warnings that Norwood is a doe-eyed existential threat to the film industry might be exaggerated, for now at least, that does not imply there is no reason for concern. Laws are sluggish and awkward, even as tech evolves rapidly. Further measures are needed to defend artists and cinematic staff, and the importance of human imaginative power.
