The AI Actress Tilly Norwood: She Isn't Art, She Represents Data.

Technology's challenge to human creativity moved a step nearer recently with the appearance of the digital performer Tilly Norwood, the inaugural fully AI-created actor. As expected, her unveiling at the Zurich film festival via a light-hearted piece named AI Commissioner provoked strong reactions. The film was called “terrifying” by Emily Blunt while the performers' union Sag-Aftra denounced it as “jeopardising performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry”.

Numerous issues surround Norwood, including the implications of her “girl-next-door” image for young women. But the more serious point involves her facial features being derived from actual performers without their knowledge or consent. Her lighthearted debut masks the fact that she is part of a new model of media production that ignores traditional standards and legal frameworks 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, and 2013’s The Congress, in which an ageing star is digitally scanned by her studio, were remarkably prescient. Last year's shocker The Substance, featuring Demi Moore as a declining famous person who creates a younger replica, similarly satirised the industry’s obsession with youth and beauty. Currently, in a Frankenstein-esque turn, the movie industry confronts the “ideal actress”.

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”, portraying AI as a fresh instrument, similar to a brush. Based on proponents' views, AI will democratise film, 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, notably in animated and science fiction categories. Two films that won Oscars recently – Emilia Perez and The Brutalist – 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, workers in the film industry are justifiably alarmed. The 2023 screenwriters' strike in Hollywood led to a limited win opposing the application 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 – extras and vocal performers, cosmetic experts and crew members.

AI actors are an inevitable product of a culture awash with social media slop, cosmetic surgery and fakery. Currently, Norwood cannot perform or engage. She lacks empathy, since, obviously, she isn't human. She isn't “art” as well; she is pure information. The human connection is the true magic of movies, and that is impossible to fabricate artificially. We watch films to see real people in real locations, feeling real emotions. We are not seeking ideal impressions.

However, although alerts that Norwood poses a wide-eyed danger to cinema may be overblown, for now at least, that does not imply there is no reason for concern. Regulations are delayed and cumbersome, while technology advances dizzyingly fast. Further measures are needed to defend artists and cinematic staff, and the value of human creativity.