Hollywood has always lived on big debuts. But the most recent one didn’t come in flesh and blood, but in code and pixels. Tilly Norwood, announced at the Zurich Festival as the “first artificial intelligence actress”, was born dividing opinions. For some, an inevitable advance. For others, a direct threat to the future of art.
The Actors Guild reacted immediately, sending a letter of disapproval, and demonstrations took to the streets of Hollywood. The panic is understandable.
If a studio can reduce costs by more than 90% by replacing human actors with a digital interpreter, what stops producers from pressuring contracts, fees and image rights? Suddenly, the battle for screen space stops being just between artists — and starts to include algorithms.
Continues after advertising
The debate goes far beyond the technological issue. The entertainment industry, for more than a century, has been built on charisma, talent and the mystique of unique personalities.
Chaplin, Monroe, Pacino, Meryl Streep. Each of them was not just an actor, but a cultural icon. Can artificial intelligence carry this same symbolic weight? Or is the proposal precisely different: creating a generation of “disposable stars”, molded to the market’s taste, without ego, without negotiation, without aging?
And more, perhaps, not so disposable — but eternal. After all, if today it is possible to digitally revive deceased artists, tomorrow we will be able to have new stars who never age, never retire and never die. Idols that no longer belong to time, but to the server that hosts them.
Continues after advertising
For critics, Tilly represents the erosion of a craft. For defenders, a creative revolution. After all, if scripts can already be written by AI, if special effects simulate entire worlds, why not have digital interpreters, capable of acting without limits on schedule or fee?
In this reasoning, it is not about extinguishing artists, but about expanding the range of possibilities — especially for low-budget, commercial or emerging market productions.
The risk, however, is that the economic shortcut will reconfigure the sector. It is not difficult to imagine that, faced with a scenario in which a protagonist costs 10% of the value of a human star, producers begin to renegotiate values with another logic. The power relationship changes sides. And, ultimately, art can become yet another industrialized, standardized, predictable product.
Continues after advertising
The arrival of Tilly Norwood brings much deeper reflections. Cinema only anticipates, on a global scale, the dilemma that affects practically all professions: to what extent does artificial intelligence replace, to what extent does it complement?
From law to journalism, from the financial market to medicine, each sector faces the same shock. In some cases, AI reduces repetitive tasks. In others, it threatens entire positions. But, in all cases, it forces a reflection: what is left of humanity when algorithms are already part of creation, decision-making and performance?
Perhaps the biggest challenge is not fearing the disappearance of traditional roles, but creating new roles that only we humans are capable of interpreting. Emotion, intuition, authenticity — no matter how simulated they are, they still have roots that no line of code reaches.
Continues after advertising
The future of work — whether on Wall Street, São Paulo or Los Angeles — will not be defined by AI alone, but by our ability to use it as a partner.
And perhaps the true star of the next era is not Tilly Norwood, nor any other algorithm, but the human ability to write stories that make sense in a world where machines also want to be protagonists.
