Why Is an AI Startup Backed by Amazon Writing Fan Fiction About Orson Welles?

Last Friday, the startup Fable introduced an ambitious initiative to reimagine the 43 lost minutes of Orson Welles’ iconic film “The Magnificent Ambersons,” a project that is as intriguing as it is perplexing.

What motivates a startup branding itself as the “Netflix of AI,” especially one backed by Amazon’s Alexa Fund, to delve into a film that is over eight decades old?

The answer lies in Fable’s innovative platform, which allows users to create their own animations using AI-generated prompts. Initially focused on original content, the company is now broadening its scope to incorporate classic Hollywood films. This technology has previously been utilized to create unauthorized episodes of “South Park.”

Fable plans to develop a tailored AI model aimed at crafting intricate, long-form narratives. Over the next two years, filmmaker Brian Rose, who has been reconstructing Welles’ original vision for five years, intends to use this model to recreate the missing scenes from “The Magnificent Ambersons.”

Interestingly, Fable has yet to obtain the rights to the film, indicating that this project may serve more as a showcase of technology rather than a public release.

Why select “Ambersons”? For those unfamiliar with Welles’ oeuvre, this choice may seem odd for digital revitalization. Among cinephiles, “Ambersons” often lives in the shadow of its more famous sibling—while “Citizen Kane” is celebrated as the greatest film ever made, Welles’ second feature is regarded as a hidden treasure, altered by studio executives to create a more optimistic conclusion.

The film’s legacy, exploring themes of loss and unrealized potential, likely drew both Fable and Rose. It’s essential to note that our contemporary interest in “The Magnificent Ambersons” is heavily shaped by Welles himself, particularly since its incomplete release adversely affected his Hollywood career, showcasing his exceptional directorial talent.

Importantly, it seems Fable has not reached out to Welles’ estate. David Reeder, who manages the estate for Welles’ daughter Beatrice, labeled the initiative in Variety as an “attempt to gain publicity through Welles’ creative legacy,” asserting that it would ultimately be “a purely mechanical endeavor, lacking the unique innovative insights a creative mind like Welles would have contributed.”

Despite Reeder’s concerns, he appears more troubled by Fable’s lack of communication than the project itself. He pointed out that “the estate has embraced AI technology to develop a voice model for use in voiceover projects with various brands.”

Personally, I’m not particularly enthusiastic about this project. Even if Welles’ heirs had been consulted and compensated, my interest in this new interpretation of “Ambersons” remains minimal, similar to my discomfort with hearing a digital imitation of Welles’s iconic voice in marketing for new products.

Welles aficionados are aware this isn’t the first time his films have been edited or completed posthumously. However, previous efforts typically utilized footage originally shot by Welles. Conversely, Fable’s approach combines AI with traditional filmmaking—reports indicate that some scenes will be re-shot using modern actors, their appearances digitally modified to resemble the original cast.

The audacity of announcing such a project without securing film rights or obtaining Welles’ daughter’s approval is striking; however, Rose genuinely seems dedicated to honoring Welles’ vision. When discussing his plans to recreate the film, Rose expressed regret over the loss of “a four-minute-long, unbroken moving camera shot, the absence of which is a tragedy,” stressing that only 50 seconds of that shot exist in the released version.

I share his sense of loss—but I also believe that this is a challenge that AI cannot adequately tackle.

Regardless of how adeptly Fable and Rose reimagine that tracking shot, it will ultimately represent their interpretation, featuring digitally altered versions of Joseph Cotten and Agnes Moorehead, rather than the original actors. The resulting product will not truly capture Welles’ authentic vision for “The Magnificent Ambersons,” which RKO modified nearly 80 years ago. Unless an extraordinary rediscovery of lost footage occurs, that version remains irretrievably lost.