Venture into the captivating world of AI-driven image generation with our blog series. As we delve into the realm of Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and other cutting-edge algorithms, discover how artificial intelligence is reshaping the landscape of visual content creation. From realistic image synthesis to artistic exploration, these articles aim to unravel the transformative impact of AI on pushing the boundaries of creativity and innovation in the field of digital imagery. Whether you are an enthusiast, a creative professional, or simply curious about the future of visual arts, join us in exploring the fascinating synergy between AI and image generation.
The backlash to AI ‘actress’ Tilly Norwood has been intense in Hollywood, as actors fear for their jobs and the very nature of creativity. But is this really the beginning of the end for actors?
Tilly Norwood is the talk of the town in Hollywood right now. But unlike most actresses, it’s not because of a performance, activism or even a public blowup. It’s because Norwood isn’t an actress at all: She’s an artificial intelligence tool.
The recent news that several agents were in talks to sign Norwood, the creation of actor, comedian and tech entrepreneur Eline Van der Velden, has sparked widespread backlash across Hollywood. It has resurfaced concerns about AI replacing human jobs in the creative arts and has sparked questions about the very nature of human creativity.
However, does an AI “actress” like Norwood really spell doom for acting as an art form?
In Hollywood, that’s the prevailing anxiety. Actors like Emily Blunt, Whoopi Goldberg and Melissa Berrera quickly voiced anger over the potential movement of AI into acting. Meanwhile, SAG-AFTRA, Hollywood’s 160,000-member actors union, had some strong words of its own.
“SAG-AFTRA believes creativity is, and should remain, human-centered. The union is opposed to the replacement of human performers by synthetics,” the union said in a statement, repeating concerns voiced during its 2023 strike.
“To be clear, ‘Tilly Norwood’ is not an actor, it’s a character generated by a computer program that was trained on the work of countless professional performers — without permission or compensation,” SAG-AFTRA continued. “It has no life experience to draw from, no emotion and, from what we’ve seen, audiences aren’t interested in watching computer-generated content untethered from the human experience.”
For Dennis Staroselsky, a Northeastern University assistant teaching professor of theater and actor with credits in movies like “Detroit” and TV shows like “The Deuce,” “it was a matter of when and not if something like this would happen.”
Developments in the AI industry are quickly taking the technology over the uncanny valley, and stories about talent agencies integrating AI into their process, if not client base, are increasingly common, he says.
Staroselsky shares many of the same concerns that, if misapplied, AI is essentially “erasing humanity” from the stories we see on screen.
“If it were to become the trend, anything that we as a society now have in terms of a lack of human connection, this will exponentially worsen it,” Staroselsky says. “I’m not sure that this would help in the cause to find empathy by staring into and supposedly feeling some sort of form of catharsis with something that is incapable of empathy.”
Cansu Canca, director of Northeastern University’s Responsible AI Practice, says some of the concerns around Norwood from creatives are warranted. The technology is improving to the point where AI “actors” “will be so convincing and so good that people will be comfortable watching them.”
Norwood’s creator might see AI actors “not as a replacement for people, but as a new tool, a new paintbrush,” according to her own statement. But Canca says it is naive to assume that studios and market forces will have the same good intentions.
“This sentence is being uttered too often in many contexts: AI is not meant to replace humans,” Canca says. “I think it is said with confidence in cases where it should never be said with confidence because we don’t control those dynamics.”
In a world with AI “actors,” Canca is still unsure whether the role of human actors will be replaced entirely. She says the knowledge and techniques human actors have would still be used to train AI performers.
“But can AI replace acting in a given job, in a given project?” Canca says. “That sounds very, very plausible.”
For his part, Staroselsky, unlike many actors, is not doomsaying just yet. A completely AI actress like Norwood is a bridge too far, but he says there are already more ethical ways AI is being used for filmmaking. He points to writers using chatbots like ChatGPT to help write loglines for pitch meetings with studios. He even sees AI tools potentially making it possible for more people to make films.
“I do see, for example, our immersive studio here [at Northeastern University] being a reason why certain students who may be studying film in New York but may not have the tools of the studio, [would] shoot their impossible dystopian Mars thing here,” Staroselsky says. “As a cost-cutting tool, as something that democratizes the process, I think that’s great.”
The studio system in Hollywood is full of its own ethical issues around how and which movies get greenlit and who gets to be put on screen. At the same time, Canca says it will be difficult to control how studios and creators are using AI now that Pandora’s box is open.
“If you have more storytelling without this much gatekeeping, you can imagine that it could serve a good purpose,” Canca says. “But yes, you are potentially destroying this particular art form as it is today.”
Whether audiences will actually want or pay to see AI-starring or even AI-directed movies remains the biggest question. A recent string of success for original, inventive films like “Sinners,” “Weapons” and “One Battle After Another” gives Staroselsky some optimism that what people want to see isn’t computer-generated content but art made by humans with something to say.
“There’s still some sense of ownership and investment into the artists that we feel have made our taste,” Staroselsky says. “I do think that’s important, and I think that’s important for everybody who consumes art to a certain degree. That’s what keeps me from thinking it’s not going to be ‘Blade Runner’ quite yet.”
Cody Mello-Klein is a Northeastern Global News reporter. Email him at c.mello-klein@northeastern.edu. Follow him on X/Twitter @Proelectioneer.
© 2025 Northeastern University
