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

On Friday, a startup called Fable unveiled a bold and at times perplexing initiative aimed at reinterpreting the 43 missing minutes from Orson Welles’ legendary film “The Magnificent Ambersons.”

What drives a startup that brands itself as the “Netflix of AI,” especially one recently backed by Amazon’s Alexa Fund, to tackle a film that’s more than 80 years old?

The answer lies in Fable’s innovative platform, which allows users to create their own animations using AI prompts. While the company initially focuses on original content, it plans to broaden its scope to include classic Hollywood films. Notably, its technology has already produced unauthorized episodes of “South Park.”

Fable is preparing to introduce a unique AI model designed to weave intricate and lengthy narratives. Over the next two years, filmmaker Brian Rose — who has been dedicated to reconstructing Welles’ original vision for five years — intends to use this model to recreate the missing scenes from “The Magnificent Ambersons.”

It’s worth mentioning that Fable has not obtained the rights to the film, indicating that this initiative may serve more as a showcase of technology rather than a project aimed at public release.

Why choose “Ambersons”? If you’re not familiar with Welles, this choice might seem odd for a digital revival. Among movie enthusiasts, “Ambersons” often resides in the shadow of its more acclaimed counterpart — while “Citizen Kane” is frequently lauded as the greatest film of all time, Welles’ second feature is often regarded as a hidden treasure, drastically altered by studio executives into an implausibly positive ending.

The film’s legacy — addressing themes of loss and unrealized potential — likely drew the interest of both Fable and Rose. However, it’s important to point out that our contemporary fascination with “The Magnificent Ambersons” is largely influenced by Welles himself, especially given how its incomplete release adversely affected his Hollywood career, despite showcasing his directorial prowess.

Notably, Fable appears to have not interacted with Welles’ estate. David Reeder, who manages the estate for Welles’ daughter Beatrice, described the project in Variety as an “attempt to gain publicity using Welles’ creative legacy,” arguing it would ultimately be “a purely mechanical endeavor lacking the unique innovative insights a creative mind like Welles would have contributed.”

Despite Reeder’s criticism, he seems more worried about the lack of engagement from Fable than about the initiative itself. He noted that “the estate has embraced AI technology to develop a voice model intended for use in voiceover work with brands.”

Personally, I’m not particularly thrilled about this concept. Even if Welles’ heirs had been consulted and compensated, my curiosity regarding this new rendition of “Ambersons” would be limited, similar to my reluctance to hear a digital imitation of Welles’s iconic voice used in promotional campaigns for new products.

Welles enthusiasts know that this isn’t the first time his films have been edited or completed after his passing. However, past efforts at least utilized footage that was originally recorded by Welles. In contrast, Fable’s approach involves merging AI with traditional filmmaking — reports indicate that certain scenes will be reshot with current actors, whose appearances will then be digitally modified to mimic the original cast.

The absurdity of announcing such a project without film rights or the consent of Welles’ daughter is remarkable, yet Rose seems genuinely committed to honoring Welles’ vision. When discussing his intent to recreate the film, Rose expressed his regret over losing “a four-minute-long, unbroken moving camera shot, the absence of which is a tragedy,” noting that only 50 seconds of that shot survive in the edited version.

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

Regardless of how skillfully Fable and Rose recreate their version of that tracking shot, it will ultimately be their interpretation, featuring digitally rendered versions of Joseph Cotten and Agnes Moorehead, not the original actors. The end product will not capture Welles’ authentic vision for “The Magnificent Ambersons” that RKO altered nearly 80 years ago. Unless a remarkable rediscovery of lost footage occurs, that version remains irretrievably lost.