The ambitious project, detailed in a recent CBS Sunday Morning report, involves a team of 2,000 people utilizing artificial intelligence for two primary purposes: drastically enhancing the film’s original resolution and employing a technique called “outpainting” to expand the footage far beyond its original 1930s frames. This aims to fill The Sphere’s colossal 160,000-square-foot wraparound LED screen. Sphere Entertainment CEO James Dolan stated the goal was “not to modify the film at all but to try and bring you into the film, as if you were in the studio when it was shot.” Turner Classic Movies host Ben Mankiewicz demonstrated how AI transforms a grainy Dorothy close-up into rich detail, then magically reveals the wider scene of the Scarecrow, Yellow Brick Road, and Oz mountains.
Outrage Over Artistic Integrity and Consent
However, leaked segments and descriptions of the AI-altered version have gone viral, met with widespread condemnation. The Oz Archive, a prominent fan account on X, asserts that “over 90% of the film has been ‘touched up’ with AI,” calling the result “disgraceful.” They highlighted comparison images showing Judy Garland’s Dorothy with unnaturally smoothed skin, stripping away the characteristic grain of classic film.
The criticism extends far beyond mere resolution enhancement. One particularly contentious example involves the Kansas farm scene. The AI version significantly widens the aspect ratio, removes the original camera pan, and generates entirely new footage – including an extra actor walking towards Dorothy in a manner never performed or shot. “Maybe the most insulting aspect… is the generation of new performances by actors who are not here to consent to this portrayal,” The Oz Archive argued. User Di echoed this on X: “Who tf do these vandals think they are?”
Film Community Condemns “Desecration”
The backlash is vehement within the film community. Respected film critic Stephen Whitty labeled the project a “desecration,” drawing parallels to the controversial butchering of the silent classic Greed and urging film lovers to protest as they did against colorization and pan-and-scan techniques decades ago. “Disappointing to see anyone from TCM lending their name to this,” Whitty posted. Others were more blunt. User @subwiredesire stated, “If you think the people who worked on The Wizard of Oz would’ve ever wanted it to look this garishly ugly, you are unbelievably stupid.” User @poddtadre mocked the justification, writing, “‘You don’t understand, they HAVE to use AI to defile the Wizard of Oz or else it won’t look right on the Sphere screen!’ Wow, sounds like they shouldn’t be screening the movie there then.”
The Core Ethical Dilemma
The controversy strikes at the heart of film preservation ethics. While digital restoration techniques to clean damage and stabilize images are widely accepted, using AI to fundamentally alter composition, generate new scenes, fabricate actor movements, and erase the inherent texture of the original medium is seen by purists as crossing a dangerous line. It raises profound questions about artistic intent, historical authenticity, and the posthumous rights of performers and creators. The debate extends beyond Oz, signaling a potential flashpoint for how AI reshapes our relationship with cultural heritage. As the digital dust settles on the Yellow Brick Road, one thing is clear: this high-tech reinterpretation has opened a fierce debate about the boundaries of cinematic preservation and the sanctity of original art, proving that even in the dazzling world of The Sphere, not all that glitters is gold.
Must Know
What exactly did AI do to The Wizard of Oz for The Sphere?
AI was used for two main purposes: significantly enhancing the resolution of the original film frames to remove grain and sharpen details (upscaling), and employing “outpainting” to generate new visual content expanding scenes beyond the original camera view. This includes widening landscapes, adding background elements, and even creating entirely new character movements not present in the 1939 film.
Why are people so angry about the AI changes?
Critics argue the alterations fundamentally disrespect the original artistic vision. Key concerns include erasing the film’s historical texture (like its grain), changing the aspect ratio and composition of shots, fabricating performances by deceased actors without consent, and adding entirely new elements that distort the directors’ and cinematographers’ intended framing and storytelling.
How is this different from standard film restoration?
Traditional restoration focuses on repairing damage (scratches, tears, fading) and stabilizing the original image/sound using the existing film elements. It aims for fidelity to the source material. The Sphere’s AI project goes beyond restoration into active reinterpretation and generation of new visual content not created by the original filmmakers, altering the film’s fundamental look and composition.
Who is leading the criticism?
Significant backlash comes from film historians, preservation organizations, critics like Stephen Whitty, and dedicated fan communities like The Oz Archive. Their core argument centers on artistic integrity, preservation ethics, and the lack of consent from the original creators and performers.
Will the original Wizard of Oz still be available?
Yes, the original 1939 version remains widely available on home media and streaming platforms. The controversy surrounds this specific AI-altered version created exclusively for The Sphere experience.
What does this mean for other classic films?
The intense reaction to the Oz alterations sets a precedent. It highlights a major ethical battleground as AI capabilities grow. Studios and venues considering similar “enhancements” for other classics will likely face significant scrutiny and pushback from preservationists and audiences concerned about protecting cinematic heritage.
