Revisiting the ‘Magnificent Ambersons’ AI Project: A Change in Perspective
Image Credits:Hulton Archive / Getty Images
Recreating the Lost Footage of “The Magnificent Ambersons”: A Controversial AI Experiment
When a startup unveiled plans last fall to use generative AI to recreate lost footage from Orson Welles’ iconic film “The Magnificent Ambersons,” I found myself skeptical. It seemed like an endeavor doomed to draw the ire of cinephiles while yielding little in the way of commercial profit. This week, Michael Schulman’s in-depth profile in The New Yorker sheds further light on the motivations behind this ambitious project led by startup Fable and its founder, Edward Saatchi, revealing a deep-rooted passion for Welles’ artistry.
Edward Saatchi’s Passion for Cinema
Saatchi, whose father co-founded the prominent advertising agency Saatchi & Saatchi, reminisced about his childhood filled with film screenings alongside his “movie mad” parents. He first encountered “The Magnificent Ambersons” at the tender age of twelve. In the New Yorker profile, Saatchi speaks to the film’s intriguing and complex legacy. Despite being less recognized than Welles’ first feature, “Citizen Kane,” “Ambersons” has a tantalizing history. Welles asserted it was a “much better picture” than “Kane,” but a disastrous preview screening led the studio to cut 43 minutes of film. Ultimately, they added an abrupt and unconvincing happy ending, destroying much of the original material in the process.
Saatchi describes the lost footage as the “holy grail of lost cinema,” expressing a belief that there must be a way to restore Welles’ original vision.
A Collective Dream of Restoration
Fable is not the first group to attempt uncovering the lost segments of “Ambersons.” They are collaborating with filmmaker Brian Rose, who has long been working on an animated interpretation using the film’s script, photographs, and Welles’ notes. Rose admits that after screening his animations for close friends and family, many were confused by the results. While Fable employs cutting-edge technology, including live-action filming followed by overlaying digital recreations of the original cast and their voices, this venture fundamentally represents a more polished version of Rose’s previous efforts: a fan’s quest to glimpse Welles’ intended narrative.
The Challenges Ahead
While Schulman’s article does showcase clips of Rose’s animations and some images of Fable’s AI-generated characters, it notably lacks any actual footage from Fable’s live-action hybrid. According to the company, they face significant hurdles, such as correcting glaring errors (like a two-headed Joseph Cotten) and the subjective challenge of replicating the intricate beauty inherent in the film’s cinematography. Saatchi describes one obstacle as a “happiness” issue, where the AI has a tendency to portray the female characters in ways that may seem excessively cheerful.
As for the public release of this footage, Saatchi has acknowledged the oversight of not consulting Welles’ estate before announcing the project. Since then, he has been attempting to foster a relationship with both the estate and Warner Bros., the film’s rights holder. Beatrice Welles, Orson’s daughter, conveyed to Schulman her initial skepticism, but she now believes that Fable is approaching the project with a fundamentally respectful attitude toward her father’s original work.
Mixed Reactions from the Welles Community
Acclaimed actor and biographer Simon Callow, who is writing the fourth volume of his Welles biography, has expressed his willingness to advise on this initiative, calling it a “great idea.” His connection to the Saatchi family adds a layer of personal investment to the project.
However, not everyone shares this enthusiasm. Melissa Galt, the daughter of actress Anne Baxter, made it clear that her mother would have disapproved of such an undertaking, stating, “It’s not the truth. It’s a creation of someone else’s truth.” Galt emphasized that once a film is completed, it should remain unchanged, spotlighting Baxter’s purist beliefs.
The Essence of Art and Acceptance of Loss
While my viewpoint has become more accommodating toward Saatchi’s endeavors, I find myself aligning with Galt’s sentiment. At its best, this undertaking may result in a novelty—a creative interpretation rather than an authentic resurrection of the lost film. Galt’s assertion that “once the movie was done, it was done” resonates deeply. This philosophy brings to mind an essay by writer Aaron Bady, who likened AI to the vampires in “Sinners.” Bady posits that both AI and vampires inevitably fall short in the realm of art. The essence of what makes art meaningful is tied to an understanding of mortality and limitation.
“There is no work of art without an ending, without the point at which the work concludes (even if the world goes on),” Bady writes. He goes on to argue that the absence of death, loss, and the separation between individual experiences negates the creation of desire, feeling, and art itself.
In this context, Saatchi’s insistence that there must be “some way to undo what had happened” can be perceived as a somewhat naïve refusal to accept the permanence of certain losses. It brings to mind the notion of a startup founder claiming to eliminate grief or a studio executive insisting on altering a classic work for the sake of a happy ending.
Conclusion
The use of generative AI to recreate lost footage from “The Magnificent Ambersons” is undoubtedly a fascinating and extravagant endeavor. It encapsulates a profound love for Orson Welles while stirring a complex conversation about the nature of art and the importance of accepting limitations. As this project unfolds, its potential impact on both cinematic history and the preservation of Welles’ legacy remains to be seen. However, it is crucial to remember that in the world of art, some losses are meant to endure.
Thanks for reading. Please let us know your thoughts and ideas in the comment section down below.
Source link
#slightly #mad #Magnificent #Ambersons #project
About The Author
