By Atanu Biswas
In late September, Tilly Norwood, an “AI actor”—created entirely by artificial intelligence (AI)—was introduced at the Zurich Film Festival. The AI talent studio Xicoia, a spin-off from AI production studio Particle6, created Norwood. She has a remarkable resemblance to Gal Gadot, Ana de Armas, and Vanessa Hudgens from the High School Musical era.
The creators hoped that Norwood would compete with real-life human movie stars like Natalie Portman, an Oscar winner, and Scarlett Johansson, an inadvertent AI symbol (recall the 2013 film Her) and Oscar nominee. The AI bot is not a substitute for people, according to comedian and business owner who runs Particle6, Eline Van der Velden. She compared Tilly Norwood to a paintbrush or a tool. AI acting is actually likened to animation, puppetry, and computer-generated imagery (CGI).
Norwood has only made one appearance to date in the short film AI Commissioner. The Guardian’s Stuart Heritage wrote in September that Norwood’s teeth appeared to be “blurring into a single white block” within. But keep in mind that Tilly Norwood is not a human. She is merely data and a collection of codes; she is not “art” either. Still, she is being promoted as the next Scarlett Johansson!
The entertainment industry, which has long struggled with the role of AI in Hollywood, was incensed by the development of Tilly Norwood. In fact, actual human actors who stand to lose their careers to her are already opposing her. The idea was denounced by prominent actors and the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA). Actors that have voiced their concerns and spoken out against AI acting bots include Emily Blunt, Kiersey Clemons, Melissa Barrera, and Lucas Gage.
“This is literally the mark of the end of the industry as we know it,” Oscar nominee Luca Guadagnino said on X. “Say goodbye to actors. No one should be supporting this.” According to SAG-AFTRA, creativity is “and should remain, human-centred”. The union is against synthetic performers replacing human actors. “It’s a character generated by a computer program that was trained based on the work of countless professional performers—without permission or compensation,” the union added. Some people even believe that the performers who were modelled by the AI should be given a share of the royalties for any future work and that the firm that created Norwood should make the names public.
“It creates the problem of using stolen performances to put actors out of work, jeopardising performer livelihoods and devaluing human artistry,” SAG-AFTRA stated. There’s an associated ad industry too which might be impacted. Norwood has already reenacted Sydney Sweeney’s controversial “great jeans” ad. The majority of the concerns revolve around how AI behaviour may displace human workers, as is the case in many industries, especially in the years following ChatGPT’s inception. In this regard, one may undoubtedly remember the prolonged strike in 2023 by SAG-AFTRA and the Writers Guild of America (WGA) over the use of AI in acting-related matters and scriptwriting.
Is there going to be another strike like this? Or would they realise that such a strike is increasingly becoming meaningless in this AI era where practically everything is getting automated? Nonetheless, the speed at which technology has advanced is astounding. There is no way to put the genie back in the bottle.
Additionally, it might be too late to be scared. “The age of synthetic actors isn’t ‘coming’—it’s here,” said Van der Velden. And Hollywood is about more than just creating art; it’s also about producing money. Reportedly, Norwood had received interest from agencies, and in the upcoming months, it will be announced which agency will represent her.
The film and television industries have long used computer-generated images, and more recently, AI-enhanced software has appeared in a variety of effects, such as “de-ageing” technology that enables performers to play younger versions of themselves. Additionally, deceased actors are being reenacted.
So, to be honest, Hollywood has been waiting for the Norwoods to arrive for a while. Films like the sci-fi Simone (2002), which tells the story of a director who uses a computer to produce the ideal actress, and The Congress (2013), which shows an ageing celebrity being digitally scanned by her studio, were shockingly predictive.
Workers in the film industry are understandably concerned, even though some people embrace such prospects and the idea of AI actors cutting production expenses by 90%. Undoubtedly, the 2023 Hollywood strikes led to a partial success against AI. The resistance is therefore not new.
Leading media companies have started pursuing AI companies for producing material that they claim violates their intellectual property rights. Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros., for instance, recently filed lawsuits against Midjourney, alleging that the photo and video creator had unlawfully trained its AI on their content, including other associated issues. However, a major issue with AI regulation is that, despite the rapid advancement of technology, the legislations are cumbersome and slow.
Well, can the AI actor, who is perceived to be the next Natalie Portman by her creator, also win an Oscar? Regardless, for those now employed in the entertainment industry who view Norwood and her kind as a poor substitute, the threat posed by Norwood is still serious. Even though Tilly Norwood is merely data and not art, she might be a significant milestone in AI’s encroachment into the realm of human creativity and could also represent a symbol of the film industry’s dazzling future, in whatever direction it chooses.
The writer is a professor of statistics, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of FinancialExpress.com. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.