Why Is an Amazon-Backed AI Startup Producing Fan Fiction About Orson Welles?

On Friday, a startup named Fable unveiled an ambitious initiative that seeks to reinterpret the 43 missing minutes of Orson Welles’ iconic film “The Magnificent Ambersons,” a task that is both intriguing and at times perplexing.

What motivates a startup branding itself as the “Netflix of AI,” particularly one backed by Amazon’s Alexa Fund, to engage with a film that is over eighty years old?

The answer is rooted in Fable’s innovative platform, which empowers users to generate their own animations through AI-driven prompts. Initially aimed at producing original content, the company now aims to extend its focus to include classic Hollywood films. Notably, their technology has already been used to create unauthorized episodes of “South Park.”

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

Interestingly, Fable has not obtained the rights to the film, indicating that this project may serve more as a showcase of technology than as a public release.

Why focus on “Ambersons”? To those unacquainted with Welles’ work, this selection may seem odd for a digital revival. Among cinephiles, “Ambersons” often exists in the shadow of its more famous counterpart—while “Citizen Kane” is widely considered the greatest film ever made, Welles’ second feature is frequently regarded as a hidden gem, notably altered by studio executives to incorporate a happier ending.

The film’s legacy—exploring themes of loss and unrealized potential—likely appealed to both Fable and Rose. However, it’s worth recognizing that our contemporary fascination with “The Magnificent Ambersons” is largely influenced by Welles himself, particularly given how its incomplete release adversely affected his Hollywood career, despite showcasing his directorial genius.

Significantly, it appears that Fable has not reached out to Welles’ estate. David Reeder, who manages the estate on behalf of Welles’ daughter Beatrice, described the project in Variety as an “attempt to gain publicity through Welles’ creative legacy,” arguing that it would ultimately be “a purely mechanical endeavor, devoid of the unique innovative insights a creative mind like Welles would have provided.”

Despite Reeder’s concerns, he seems more troubled by Fable’s lack of communication than the project itself. He mentioned 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 initiative. Even if Welles’ heirs had been consulted and compensated, my interest in this new version of “Ambersons” remains limited, much like my discomfort with hearing a digital mimicry of Welles’s legendary voice in marketing campaigns for new products.

Welles aficionados know this isn’t the first instance of his films being edited or completed posthumously. However, previous efforts typically utilized footage originally shot by Welles. In contrast, Fable’s approach combines AI with traditional filmmaking—reports indicate that some scenes will be re-shot with contemporary actors, whose appearances will then be digitally altered to resemble the original cast.

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

I share his sense of loss—but I also contend that this is a challenge that AI cannot satisfactorily meet.

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