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

Last Friday, Fable, a startup, unveiled a bold initiative aimed at reimagining the 43 missing minutes of Orson Welles’ legendary film “The Magnificent Ambersons.” This project is both captivating and confusing.

What drives a startup, branding itself as the “Netflix of AI” and backed by Amazon’s Alexa Fund, to delve into a film that’s been around for more than eighty years?

The answer lies in Fable’s sophisticated platform, which enables users to create their own animations through AI-generated prompts. While primarily focused on original content, the company is expanding its reach to classic Hollywood films. This technology has previously facilitated the creation of unofficial episodes of “South Park.”

Fable aims to develop a custom AI model designed to produce complex, long-form narratives. Over the next two years, filmmaker Brian Rose, who has been trying to reconstruct Welles’ original vision for the past five years, intends to use this model to recreate the missing scenes from “The Magnificent Ambersons.”

Interestingly, Fable still hasn’t secured the rights to the film, indicating that this project may serve more as a demonstration of technology than a genuine intent for public release.

Why focus on “Ambersons”? For those unfamiliar with Welles’ work, the choice of this film for digital revival might appear odd. Among film enthusiasts, “Ambersons” often exists in the shadow of its more famous sibling—while “Citizen Kane” is hailed as the greatest film ever made, Welles’ second feature is regarded as a hidden treasure, altered by studio executives for a more hopeful ending.

The film’s legacy, which delves into themes of loss and unfulfilled potential, likely piqued the interest of both Fable and Rose. It’s essential to note that our modern fascination with “The Magnificent Ambersons” is significantly shaped by Welles himself, especially since its unfinished release had negative repercussions on his Hollywood career, highlighting his extraordinary directorial talents.

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

Despite Reeder’s criticism, he appears more upset by Fable’s lack of engagement than the project itself. He observed 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 excited about this project. Even if Welles’ heirs were consulted and compensated, my interest in this new interpretation of “Ambersons” remains limited, much like my discomfort with hearing a digital mimicry of Welles’s iconic voice used to market new products.

Fans of Welles are aware that this isn’t the first time his films have been edited or completed posthumously. However, past efforts generally relied on footage originally captured by Welles. In contrast, Fable’s approach combines AI with traditional filmmaking—reports indicate that some scenes will be re-shot with contemporary actors, digitally altered to resemble the original cast.

It’s remarkably audacious to announce such a project without obtaining film rights or securing Welles’ daughter’s endorsement; nonetheless, Rose seems genuinely devoted to honoring Welles’ vision. While discussing his plans to recreate the film, Rose expressed sorrow over the lost “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 believe this is a challenge that AI cannot thoroughly meet.

No matter how skillfully Fable and Rose reimagine that tracking shot, it will ultimately represent their interpretation, featuring digitally modified renditions of Joseph Cotten and Agnes Moorehead instead of the original actors. The final product will not authentically capture Welles’ true vision for “The Magnificent Ambersons,” which RKO altered nearly 80 years ago. Unless an extraordinary rediscovery of lost footage occurs, that version will remain irretrievably lost.