The core conflict revolves around the ethics of using AI trained on human performances without consent, compensation, or agency. (Image: Social Media)
A rising star on the internet, Tilly Norwood made her acting debut at a major film festival. But she is not a human being. Unveiled in September 2025 at the Zurich Film Festival, Tilly is an entirely AI-generated entity created by the UK-based Particle6 Productions and its AI talent studio, Xicoia. Tilly was created as a flexible and timeless digital performer by Dutch actor and technologist Eline van der Velden. On social media, she presents a relatable narrative, making it difficult to distinguish between truth and synthetic fiction. This very realism is at the center of an expanding industry-wide discussion.
So, what does Tilly Norwood represent for the future of filmmaking? According to her creators, she is a "new paintbrush" for artists. Her look and performances were refined by training on the work of innumerable professional human performers, and she was constructed utilizing a variety of AI programs. This process allows her to generate expressions and deliver lines without a human performer on set. Particle6 Productions argues that this technology can slash production costs and offer creators a tireless, endlessly malleable star. Despite receiving mixed responses from viewers, her first acting attempt was in the online comedy sketch AI Commissioner, which functioned as a proof of concept.
The emergence of Tilly Norwood has ignited a firestorm of criticism from Hollywood's human workforce. Actors and their unions are the most strident opponents. The American actors' organization SAG-AFTRA said in a scathing statement that "Tilly Norwood is not an actor" but rather a computer-generated character who pilfers "stolen performances" from real performers without their consent or compensation.
Actors like Emily Blunt, Melissa Barrera, and Mara Wilson fear that AI in films could cost them their careers and destroy what makes human acting special.
Critics say the issue isn’t just about losing jobs — it also brings up serious ethical questions, since AI actors have no free will and can’t give consent. This is problematic in the post-#MeToo context because it suggests that the digital entity can be used for any type of content. In addition, the problem of likeness stealing has turned into a courtroom dispute. The Scottish actress Briony Monroe is among the human actors who have claimed that Tilly was made using their likenesses and body language without their consent. Who really owns the performance that results from training an AI on your work? This is a crucial question.
Also Read: Sanju Samson to Play Ranji Opener as Mohammed Azharuddeen Leads Kerala
Tilly Norwood's "career" is progressing in spite of the criticism. According to reports, talent agents are interested in representing her, indicating that some people in the business perceive financial possibilities. According to her designer, Eline van der Velden, Tilly is a work of art that should provoke discussion rather than take the place of real actors. She has stated that she sees "AI not as a replacement for people, but as a new tool, a new paintbrush." However, the ultimate judgment may lie with audiences. Will viewers connect with a performer who has no lived experience, or will they reject what they see as a hollow imitation of human emotion?
