Tilly Norwood: She’s Not Art, She Represents Data.
The threat to human creativity from technology advanced another step this week with the appearance of this AI-generated actress, the inaugural fully AI-created actor. Unsurprisingly, her unveiling at the Zurich film festival within a humorous short titled AI Commissioner provoked strong reactions. Emily Blunt labeled the movie “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. Yet the graver concern is that her face has been made from those of real actors lacking their awareness or approval. Her lighthearted debut masks the fact that she embodies an innovative system for producing media which disregards established conventions and regulations overseeing artists and their creations.
Hollywood has been anticipating Norwood’s arrival for some time. 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, were remarkably prescient. The recent body horror film The Substance, featuring Demi Moore as a declining famous person who creates a younger replica, 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.
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”, describing AI as a new tool, like a paintbrush. According to its advocates, artificial intelligence will open up film production, since everyone will be able to make movies without the resources of a big studio.
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. And AI is already part of film-making, primarily in cartoon and sci-fi types. Two of last year’s Oscar-winning films – The Brutalist and Emilia Perez – utilized artificial intelligence to refine 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, film industry staff have valid reasons for worry. The 2023 screenwriters' strike in Hollywood led to a limited win resisting the deployment of artificial intelligence. And while A-listers’ views on Norwood have been widely reported, once again, it's the lesser-known workers whose positions are most threatened – background and voice actors, makeup artists and production teams.
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 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 are not seeking ideal impressions.
However, although alerts that Norwood poses a wide-eyed danger to cinema may be overblown, currently, anyway, that isn't to say there are no threats. Legislation is slow and clunky, while technology advances dizzyingly fast. More must be done to protect performers and film crews, and the value of human creativity.
