Tilly Norwood: She Isn't Art, She’s Data.
Technology's challenge to human creativity advanced another step this week with the appearance of this AI-generated actress, the inaugural fully AI-created actor. As expected, her premiere at the Zurich film event via a light-hearted piece named AI Commissioner caused an outcry. Emily Blunt labeled the movie “terrifying” and Sag-Aftra, the actors' guild, criticized it for “endangering actors' incomes and undermining human artistic value”.
Many concerns arise with Norwood, including the implications of her “girl-next-door” image for young women. However, the deeper issue is the construction of her face using real actors' likenesses absent their permission or notification. Her playful premiere obscures the truth that she is part of a new model of media production 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, 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, turned out to be incredibly forward-thinking. Last year's shocker The Substance, starring Demi Moore as a waning celebrity who spawns a younger clone, likewise mocked the film world's fixation on youth and attractiveness. Now, Victor Frankenstein-like, the film world is staring the “perfect actress” in the face.
Norwood’s creator, the actor and writer Eline Van der Velden supported her by saying she is “not taking a human's place”, instead “a work of art”, describing AI as a new tool, like a paintbrush. Based on proponents' views, AI will democratise film, since everyone will be able to make movies without the resources of a big studio.
Starting with the Gutenberg press through sound films and television, every artistic upheaval has faced fear and criticism. The visual effects Oscar hasn't always existed, of course. Furthermore, artificial intelligence is already involved in movie production, especially in animation and sci-fi genres. A pair of last year's Academy Award-winning movies – The Brutalist and Emilia Perez – used AI to enhance 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, once again, it's the lesser-known workers whose positions are most threatened – 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. As yet, Norwood can’t act or interact. She cannot relate emotionally, for, clearly, she is not a real being. She is not “artistic” too; she is merely data. The genuine enchantment of films lies in human connection, and that is impossible to fabricate artificially. We view movies to observe actual individuals in authentic settings, experiencing genuine feelings. We don't desire flawless atmospheres.
However, although alerts that Norwood poses a wide-eyed danger to cinema may be overblown, currently, anyway, that doesn’t mean there is nothing to fear. Regulations are delayed and cumbersome, even as tech evolves rapidly. More must be done to protect performers and film crews, and the value of human creativity.
