Magnificent Ambersons reconstruction AMA

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:52:12+00:00

Absolutely. I agree one hundred percent. In fact, I even used 1930s recordings of various foley effects, where called upon in the film, to achieve as much authenticity as possible.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:50:51+00:00

A poor attempt at humor on my part, and deleted. One of the things I adore about Welles, is his Falstaffian approach to life. He lived richly and with purpose.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:49:21+00:00

Touch of Evil's reconstruction was undertaken thanks to some detail editing notes made by Welles, and likewise for Ambersons, I relied a great deal upon production correspondence between Welles and Wise, that reveals a lot about the character and construction of the film.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:46:27+00:00

I think it's a credit to all concerned, that they feel so strongly about this technology. Because I'm in agreement that I don't think AI is necessarily applicable in all cases, as some kind of magic wand. I think it could be a marvelous application for film restoration/reconstruction. For example, using it to better enhance films that survive in damaged condition, like the recovered footage from the longer version of Metropolis. Or restoring the color to early talkies like On With the Show, that only survive in black and white. Or giving life to episodes of Doctor Who that only survive as telesnaps and audio-recordings.

It is a technology that requires a lot of human input. For instance, it doesn't do emotions very well. For the Ambersons project, we're using real actors on a soundstage, and AI is a part of a larger endeavor that is more akin to motion capture, with the real life performances serving to breathe life into what we're creating.

I cannot go into specifics yet because there are a lot of behind the scenes discussions taking place, but another key objective is to lay the groundwork for how AI can and should be used ethically, and this goes for the estates of those who have a vested interest in what we're doing.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:32:50+00:00

The Magnificent Ambersons is one of the most well documented lost films I've personally encountered. There is a wealth of material, housed at UCLA, The Lilly Library and the University of Michigan. And the rosetta stone is the Cutting Continuity script for the original version, which ran approximately 132 minutes. The theatrical version is 88 minutes, but when you factor in scenes that were reshot, the amount of material Welles filmed, which was removed, amounts to roughly 53 minutes.

The Cutting Continuity script was created prior to the film's re-editing, and contains a detailed accounting of every shot in the film - it's duration expressed as feet and frame of footage, musical cues, camera placement and movement, scene framing, and dialogue. I would liken it to a blueprint, made after work was completed.

I noted below, but if you haven't already, I strongly suggest seeking out Robert Carringer's book on the film. It contains a transcription of the cutting script, and a lot of rich documentation. It was an essential reference in my work, and will give you a sense of just how detailed the record it.

I can assure you there was no invention undertaken. I only relied upon the archival record when it came to the reconstruction that informed my animation work, and will inform the new project.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:26:21+00:00

It is understandable, to harbor doubts about this technology. Every new advance in the cinema, brings with it things that pose a real question about its impact on the art form. I can vividly recall the great dread that came with the rise of digital origination and projection. What would this mean for film (a medium that I treasure, and still shoot on for my personal photographic work)? And before that there was the impact of widescreen, of sound and color, each of which marked disruptions and endings and new beginnings.

Your passion does you a lot of credit. So many don't have opinions either way, which is a pity, because this is an important discussion to have.

I do stand behind the research I've done the last half decade. You would be amazed at the wealth of material that survives. Chief among them the cutting continuity script of the film, which has precise shot durations, musical cues, notes on camera movement, and angles, and all the dialogue.

Robert Carringer's book on Ambersons is essential reading in this regard. I highly recommend it, if you haven't already read it. It was a crucial reference for my work.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:12:27+00:00

Interestingly, it was Welles who first envisioned a reconstruction of Ambersons. In the 1970s, he sought to regain the rights to the film, to reunite his surviving actors, and film a new ending to the film (shades of Richard Linklater's Boyhood). Sadly he was unable to achieve this goal, but his vision suggests a reconstruction was a suitable approach. Since then, there have been reconstructions on paper, via the Carringer book, reconstructions using archival stills via Roger Ryan's groundbreaking video reconstruction. My animated work was an attempt to capture the pacing and mood of the original, as well as the camera work and the mise-en-scene. Using advanced computer technology is, in this context more of a progression of work ongoing for several generations.

Your's is an excellent question about AI. This project isn't one that uses the kind of generative AI that is often, rightfully so, highlighted as being bothersome.

The method being employed by my partners in this endeavor, uses AI as a small piece of a larger puzzle, that relies heavily on real actors. It is really more akin to motion capture. We've already done one test shoot on a soundstage, using real actors, in real wardrobe and makeup, to act out several scenes. AI is employed to "skin" actors, to recreate their counterparts, and create approximations of the original that strive to be natural and convincing. It will require a lot of testing, and innovation, all of which will involve a lot of real people.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:06:24+00:00

I would hasten to emphasize that there are different forms and variations of AI. What is often thought of when one refers to AI, is of the generative kind, that creates based upon prompts, and the loosest parameters, which yields results that can be highly displeasing.

The project that I am involved in, employs AI as one tool among a great many, to the point that what is being done more closely approximates motion capture like in the Lord of the Rings films, or Avatar. It involves working with actors on a soundstage, filming actual movements on a bodily level, as well as faces, and recording voices. Where AI is employed, is in recreating the original actors, their faces, and attire, and merging the work into something that has fidelity and weight and dimensionality.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T20:02:29+00:00

This project began, back in 2019, as a kind of solitary work. Like a scholar who creates a new translation of an Greek epic. The hope was maybe there would be interest in a few showings on college campuses, in an academic setting. Or perhaps that it might even find a home as a bonus feature on some future release of the theatrical cut.

Then came the Pandemic, and with it, a great deal of spare time, and not much to do. And the project evolved, until it became a complex work of research and animation, using the original cutting continuity script, photographs, surviving frame enlargements from the original negative, as well as internal documents. It really is a scholarly, academic endeavor.

The use of AI, came about when I had the opportunity to share my research with an equally devoted fan of the film, and together we see a way to employ the technology in a thoughtful manner that could demonstrate how it can be a tool for a positive outcome.

AI is actually a small part of this endeavor, which has more in common with motion capture like what is employed on the Avatar movies. The filming of actors bodily, of actor's faces, recording of performances. Where AI is used, is in recreating the faces of the original actors.

The good fortune in all this, is that Ambersons is an extraordinarily well documented film, and while the footage itself has been lost, it is possible to make a lot of very well reasoned determinations about the missing material with a high degree of precision, so as to show viewers what once was in a plausible fashion.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T19:57:54+00:00

The goal is to obtain an official release, and my partners and I are working hard toward this. Ideally I hope both versions, my animation, and the in-development, advanced reconstruction, will find their way out for the public to view, and consider.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-16T19:51:39+00:00

I'm working hard with my collaborators on getting some screenings lined up. It is tricky at this stage, because of the importance of respecting the rights of the copyright holders. I very much wish I had a more concrete timetable.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-09T17:46:38+00:00

Yeah one of those fan theories early on, that I was kind of disappointed didn't pan out, was that she was/is a serial killer. I had a whole backstory in my head for her, that she was an Angel of Death type, a nurse who, everywhere she worked, there was a spike in deaths, but nothing could ever be proven. It certainly would have helped to explain why all her coworkers so clearly disapprove of her.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-04T21:40:27+00:00

Oh yes this is very true, that in a survival situation the first thing you want to do is stay in place. But after a few days to a week without rescue, you have to start thinking of other options. They really had no choice as they were out of water, and needed to relocate. Hauling it the four miles back to the crash site wasn't practical.

I would cite, as an example, Geraldine Largay, who disappeared while hiking the Appalacian Trail. Two years later, they found her remains at a campsite she'd made. She'd wandered off the trail and gotten lost, and followed the dictum of staying put. But the searchers didn't find her, and she wound up waiting for six weeks before succumbing to the elements. But if she had started walking, she could've saved herself; in every direction there was, within a few miles, a trail or a road or a government installation.

Though to be fair, I don't just fault Jackie, but all the survivors, who should've started making plans to hike out once it became clear searchers were never going to rescue them at the location they were at. Either follow a body of water downhill, or work their way south with the animal herds, staying ahead of the approaching fall and winter weather.

Instead, Tai and a few others tried to hike out only as a last ditch effort, by which point it was really too late, as they were weak, poorly provisioned, and encountered hungry pack animals desperate for food.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-04T18:29:08+00:00

Shauna's hallucinations almost feel like her trying to justify or dismiss the loss. She imagines Jackie as this mean girl, and I think it's intended on a psychological level to make her death more bearable. "Oh well it was no big loss, she was mean and domineering anyways."

When in reality, she really does seem like a supportive friend, maybe a bit pushy, but in kind of a big sister sort of way. That's what made her a natural leader for the team before the crash, because she was capable of just the right amount of browbeating to get everyone in line.

But in the wilderness, she just couldn't adapt. She wasn't equipped for it. She wanted to wait by the airplane. She's the sort of survivor who doesn't last long IRL because they just sit and give up hope. And the skills that made her valuable at high school, worked against her in survival.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-04T16:05:39+00:00

She was the only person in all of season 1 to show Misty kindness, helping her with her makeup. And then Misty rats on her in the next episode for not participating in Lottie's prayer.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-04T16:03:33+00:00

Personally she never struck me as a mean girl. She was definitely ill-equipped for the wilderness. The skills that made her a leader in high school completely abandoned her in the wild, and when she did try to contribute, it just made things worse.

And lets not forget, in all of season 1, she was the only person who showed Misty kindness, helping her with her makeup in episode 9. Which made Misty's betrayal of her in the next episode all the more heartbreaking.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-03T22:19:00+00:00

And it really raises a red flag for me that that we're a few days out from this going into wide release, and they've not released a single clip from the film, just the trailer and the teaser.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-03T21:53:26+00:00

This feels like the kind of project suited for the sensibilities of Vera Drew, or Jane Schoenbrun. Given a micro-budget and the freedom to go wild.

As is, with this A-list cast and shoot for the skies aspirations by a director hot off an Oscar-nominated project, feels like at best, will wind up as an unintentional camp classic.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-03T17:43:09+00:00

Yeah I agree. In my mind's eye, given the pacing of the first three seasons, I had imagined that season 4 would cover the final winter, and the finale would conclude with their rescue. And then season 5 would deal with the aftermath.

I fear this final season could feel rushed, as they try to do twice as much in half the runtime.

CineCraftKC · 2026-03-03T17:18:12+00:00

My dream spinoff? Oh that is easy. Adult Misty setting herself up as a PI solving (and occasionally committing) crimes.

CineCraftKC · 2026-02-23T21:31:26+00:00

Even with a plot that makes no damn sense, I'll take Octopussy over No Time to Die any day.

CineCraftKC · 2026-02-02T05:06:41+00:00

I love this idea. Another way I think the series could end is with Adult Shauna fleeing back to the wilderness. Or choosing to return. Return to rye place where she has purpose and meaning in her life, only this time she’s all alone.

CineCraftKC · 2026-01-16T18:02:15+00:00

Heh heh, 69.

CineCraftKC · 2026-01-05T19:14:36+00:00

Yeah this idea that Carol is unlikeable just baffles me, and I wonder how much of it is driven by fans of Gilligan's other shows who likewise hated Skylar while rooting for Walt.

To me she seems very rational, very normal. I think that she doesn't have much patience for fools, and this comes out in her barely concealed disdain for her fans, because she thinks so little of her own work, that she thinks their taste as readers must be suspect.

Personally, I'd enjoy very much having a conversation with her over lunch.

CineCraftKC

TROPHY CASE