*Updated 2026
Artificial Intelligence can leave humans with two very opposing feelings: empowerment and insecurity. If we had to look for a place where those two feelings thrive most, the target would land straight on Hollywood’s back.
Picture an actor who doesn’t age, doesn’t need a vacation, and can appear in an entirely computer-generated world. For filmmakers, that might sound like a dream. For performers trying to earn a paycheck, it could be a nightmare. “AI actors” can mean several different things. Some are entirely invented digital characters. Others are replicas of real performers that recreate their faces or voices. AI can also change an existing performance, such as making an actor look younger. As SAG-AFTRA’s guide explains, these distinctions matter. Giving an actor a younger face is one thing. Replacing their performance with a digital counterpart is a whole different story.
AI Actors are a Breakthrough
A New Creative Medium
Audiences and producers have embraced animation, puppetry, and CGI with open arms over the years. So, why should AI fictional characters be treated any differently? A fictional character doesn’t need to be a living person to tell a compelling story. Especially when the past has shown how various aspects of entertainment have relied on artists using invented characters. AI is just a new medium through which writers, designers, editors, and directors can express themselves in today’s innovative age. One heavily discussed example is the AI actress Tilly Norwood. The Washington Post reported that her creator, Eline van der Velden, defended the ‘actress’ as a creative work comparable to animation, puppetry, or CGI. From this perspective, human creativity lies in constructing and directing the character, even when the performer on screen is artificial.
Bigger Possibilities for Smaller Filmmakers
For independent or lesser-known filmmakers, every location, shooting day, and cast member comes with a price tag. AI could make crowd scenes, fantasy worlds, and additional characters more affordable without having to stage or film. That could let a smaller team pursue an ambitious script rather than rewrite it based on budget concerns. A 2026 McKinsey report found that AI could help teams work 5–10% more efficiently on certain production tasks, including planning before filming begins. Particle6 claimed that its AI-driven methods could reduce production costs by up to 90%. These findings and claims suggest that AI could help filmmakers tell more ambitious stories on much smaller budgets, providing a more equal opportunity for all filmmakers.
It Can Help Expand on a Character’s Journey
Over the decades, technology has transformed cinema from silent black-and-white films into sound, color, digital effects, and now AI-assisted filmmaking, expanding how stories are told and experienced. Today, the opportunities in cinema, from production to distribution, feel endless, especially with the use of AI. Real-life actors have expressed the creative benefits AI has provided them with whilst filming. In the movie Here, AI allowed Tom Hanks and Robin Wright to see younger versions of themselves on a monitor during filming and adjust their performances accordingly. In an AARP interview, Tom Hanks said this helped him refine his posture and movements, while Robin Wright described reconnecting with her younger innocence. VFX supervisor Kevin Baillie added that both actors helped shape their younger likenesses. AI broadened the ages they could convincingly play, while maintaining their own performances at the core. This just proves the way in which AI can help support actors’ journeys, rather than replacing them.
AI Actors are a Mistake
An Incentive to Replace Workers
A major concern with creative technology is the incentive to use it to cut costs. If producers can generate performers instead of hiring human actors, they may prioritize savings over talent. In its statement on AI character Tilly Norwood, SAG-AFTRA explicitly opposed replacing human performers with synthetic ones, warning that this could threaten livelihoods and devalue acting as a whole. The risk goes beyond leading actors. Background performers could also lose paid work if digital copies replace them. Meanwhile, actors may feel pressured to allow digital copies of themselves to secure their roles. SAG-AFTRA’s guidance explains that producers can make agreeing to a digital scan a condition of being hired, as long as the law allows it. Although actors retain rights over how their replicas are used, refusing the scan could cost them the job. Ultimately, even studios that can afford human actors may choose digital performers if doing so ensures they earn greater profits.
AI Actors Learn From Real Performers
An AI actor may have a generated face, but the tools behind it can learn from real actors’ performances. Did those performers consent to that use? Did they receive credit or payment? Critics allege that developers have trained the underlying technology on performers’ work without their permission. In a Reuters interview, Norwood’s creator, Eline van der Velden, explained that her team uses publicly available AI tools with limited visibility into their training data. Without that information, actors may struggle to establish whether their work helped create a synthetic competitor. The U.S. Copyright Office’s 2025 report warns that AI can create content that competes with the very work it learned from. For actors, this raises concerns that their performances could train an AI replacement without their knowledge. An invented face should not erase the responsibility to recognize and compensate for the human talent behind it.
AI Actors Weaken a Performance’s Authenticity
Even if a performance is realistic, audiences often find it far less moving once they know AI generated it. A 2025 study in Nature Human Behaviour covered nine experiments with 6,282 participants. People rated AI-generated emotional responses as more empathetic and supportive when they believed those responses came from humans. This suggests that the perceived source of information or content can influence emotional reactions from viewers. In cinema, knowing a character is AI could also make them less likeable or relatable, leaving viewers less invested in their relationships, struggles, and fate. The stronger distinction is how the performance is created. Many animated characters are brought to life through human voice acting and animators’ deliberate choices about expressions, timing, and movement. A fully generated AI performance may automate more of those choices, despite humans being able to direct or refine the work. When audiences see the technology instead of the character, even the most convincing performance risks leaving audiences unsatisfied.
The Bottom Line: The same cost savings that could help an independent filmmaker finish a film could give a major studio a reason to hire fewer actors. That tension sits at the heart of this debate: AI can make filmmaking more accessible while making acting a less secure profession.
