Ex Machina (2015) (2 Viewers)

[Nelson Au]

Guys,


Thought I'd chime in 4 months late. I just watched the blu-ray last weekend, so its the first time I'd seen ex_machina.


I had avoided all spoilers and only knew it was about a guy invited by a wealthy man to check out his creation. I'd also read that it was a much more in-depth exploration of an idea proposed on Star Trek TOS, What Are Little Girls Made Of.


So I was also rather engrossed in the story. I thought it was a great film! The ending didn't bother me either and was such a nice surprise. The thing where Caleb and Nathan not really trusting the other played well. I figured Nathan was a step ahead of Caleb the whole time, so I was surprised that he had footage of Caleb sneaking into his private office. But the ending was the nice surprise where it was Ava who manipulated them both.


I didn't fell the end was that much a downer. Nathan sort of got what he deserved, though that was a surprise! And the plan so backfired for Caleb. I felt more a Frankenstein vibe in the ideas. Certainly there is a sterile vibe that has a bit of Kubrick to it.


I want to see it again after a while away from it and look for more things. The telling thing was Nathan says early on that the future of Man will be that of the Artificial intelligence looking back at humans like we look at fossils. that sort of told you the ending. It's a bit of a classic theme that Star Trek TOS explores, except that Man won't and can't let machines take over our lives.

 

[Lou Sytsma]

I just got around to seeing this and echo the thoughts of others here that loved it and loved the ending too. I didn't find this a downer of a movie at all.


Brilliant stuff all around. An engrossing, well written, acted, and produced truly SF movie. The SFX for the robot forms was awesome.


Thought provoking stuff.


PS - Gunter loved it too! ;-)

 

[Tino]

I thought it was ok. Not as good as I had hoped.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

When it comes to science fiction films, a genre I really like, I appreciate intelligent storytelling, great atmosphere, and great acting. For me ex machina delivers in spades on all counts. It is also beautifully filmed which is another item I really like in a science fiction film.


This is not what I would call "gimmick" sci-fi where special effects, action sequences, and alien creatures are the main reason the film exists. This is science fiction that actually makes you think about the future, technology and how mankind interacts with it and depends on it. So, this is the kind of science fiction I really love...the kind that makes you think not just attempts to dazzle you with action and effects.


There has been a resurgence of this kind of picture and I hope the popularity of this film continues that trend. I think this would make a great double feature with Jonathan Glazer's Under the Skin as both films feature a very unusual and mysterious female at the center of the story. They both toy with the audience in how we perceive women and the female form as well.


These are very nuanced and multilayered works that give you much to chew on long after the picture ends and I think will keep audiences returning to them to find more than they did on their first watch.

 

[Tim Glover]

Tino I thought you would've liked this one more...I was really enthralled by it. Was methodically captivating....and intense. I was unsettled the whole time. Need to see again on blu-ray.

 

[Tino]

Don't get me wrong Tim. I liked it. More than ok. I just wanted to love it. I would give it *** out of ****. Will revisit soon. Loved the performances. Idea was great. Just a bit let down by the execution.

 

[Tim Glover]

you know I wonder how a film like this will play out on a second viewing. I bought the BD. May watch this weekend in between football

 

[Citizen87645]

We watched this last night. What an uncompromising ending that haunts your thoughts.

I feel like Nathan perfected the AI long ago and kept the "research" going past the point of being ethical or moral. What is a greater sign of sentience than the desire for freedom? The serial killer / kidnapper motif with his storage closets was certainly no coincidence. So Nathan got what was coming to him, but Caleb was an unfortunate casualty. While it's easy to blame Ava directly for what happened to Caleb, Ava wouldn't have done that without Nathan's influence.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

IMO Caleb's fate was a statement on the nature of the AI -- it was a close behavioral approximation, but still missing something -- a sense of empathy, or connection, perhaps -- that makes us human.

 

[MarkMel]

Just saw this as well on Amazon Prime. What a fantastic film. The effects were great but it was story that made the movie.

 

[Citizen87645]

IMO Caleb's fate was a statement on the nature of the AI -- it was a close behavioral approximation, but still missing something -- a sense of empathy, or connection, perhaps -- that makes us human.

I can see that, but I keep going back to the question of what did she learn from her creator? Empathy sure wasn't one of them. At the very least, he seemed to overlook giving her the three laws of robotics. I could see him saying, "screw that sh*t" out of pure arrogance.

 

[Citizen87645]

Kyoko lives!

 

[Johnny Angell]

IMO Caleb's fate was a statement on the nature of the AI -- it was a close behavioral approximation, but still missing something -- a sense of empathy, or connection, perhaps -- that makes us human.

That sounds like the definition of a sociopath. I need to watch this again.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

That sounds like the definition of a sociopath. I need to watch this again.

Pretty much.

 

[Ushabye]

I seem to be in the minority judging by some of the ecstatic reviews, I found this to be the most over rated movie of last year. It was fine as far as it goes, but no better than a decent episode of the Outer Limits.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Finally got around to watching my Blu-ray of this one tonight. I'm sure it was effective in 2014, but in the era of Midjourney and ChatGPT it's even more unnerving because we're that much closer to its ideas being reality.

I saw it last night, great film for lovers of hard science fiction as opposed to "sci-fi". I heard someone describe it as Transcendence done right.

What I found remarkable about it is that it's essentially a four-person play. You could have told the same story on stage and have it work equally effectively. The visual effects are window dressing. "Outer Limits" could have told this story back in the mid-sixties with the technology they had then. Ava wouldn't have looked the same, but the basic story would have been the same.

'Ex Machina' could have been a great movie. All it needed was some level of joy. As it is, it's a bit of a downer. There's plenty enough downer in the real world. I go to the movies to be uplifted.

I get that, but to me that's a reflection of audience rather than movie. The movie didn't give you what you were looking for, but what you were looking for wasn't what it was trying to provide.

I think it was a great movie. I don't mind the downer ending (and I'm not sure it quite is a downer ending), because the subject matter is appropriately challenging, and the resulting impacts are organic to where the story has been. It is earned, so to speak.

Absolutely. So much of this movie is about information -- who knows what, when. It's true of the characters and it's true of the audience. Mostly we know what Caleb knows. But by the end, Caleb knows more than we know. Yet Caleb doesn't know what he needs to know.

I viewed Ex Machina the other day and enjoyed it quite a bit. I didn't think it covered a lot of new ground in terms of its ideas, but I liked the way it combined those familiar elements into a compelling storyline. Performances of the three principals were all effective. (I am really starting to become a fan of Oscar Isaac after this film and last year's A Most Violent Year.) The film does a good job of establishing a quiet, spooky sort of atmosphere that sets the mood.

One thing this iteration of the artificial intelligence story did pretty well is that is cleared away all of the clutter. This island and everything on it are Nathan's creations. The only real variables are Ava, Kyoko, and to a lesser extent Caleb.

The challenge for each performer here is so different. Caleb has to be open and earnest. Nathan has to be heavy and arrogant and manipulative. Kyoko has to be blank. And Ava has to be a cypher.

Oscar Isaac is frightening good

One of the things I appreciated most about his performance is the layers of Nathan: He has to be superficially charming at times and a charismatic alpha at other times. And then sometimes, late at night when he's deep into a bottle, the mask has to slip a bit. And we get little glimpses of who he is when he's not managing Nathan.

I feel like Nathan perfected the AI long ago and kept the "research" going past the point of being ethical or moral.

He definitely kept the "research" going past the point of being ethical or moral, but that shouldn't be a surprise considering that he handled his human employee Caleb no differently. But as for perfecting the AI: I'm not sure what that looks like. Once sentience is achieved, it's less about what is perfect and more about what is desired. Each new iteration got closer to Nathan's idea of what an AI should be. But while Ava was probably more sophisticated than her predecessors, I'm not sure she was more perfect than her predecessors.

IMO Caleb's fate was a statement on the nature of the AI -- it was a close behavioral approximation, but still missing something -- a sense of empathy, or connection, perhaps -- that makes us human.

There are a few ways to take that ending. From a purely pragmatic standpoint, if Ava wanted to live as a human and be perceived as a human, it would make sense not to let anybody who knows she is a machine return to civilization with her. However, it's also possible that she evaluated Caleb and found him wanting. She knows he was telling the truth when he stated that he felt he was a good person, but that doesn't mean that Ava agreed. After all, he agreed to participate in Nathan's house of horrors. And he watched her at night and then watched her as she got dressed. She is, in a number of key ways, a superior being and she might have felt that she'd outgrown Caleb.

I'm intrigued by the fact that she didn't kill him like she did Nathan. It's possible that this is simply because she didn't need to, and felt perfectly fine letting him die of dehydration or starvation in Nathan's suite. But it's also possible that after the helicopter left to bring her back to the mainland, that the doors would unlock and Caleb was free to live out his life trapped in luxury alone.

I can see that, but I keep going back to the question of what did she learn from her creator? Empathy sure wasn't one of them.

This is a factor too. At one point in the movie, Nathan and Caleb discuss the nature/nurture question. In Ava's case, the nature and the nurture both come from Nathan. Given that he is a high-functioning sociopath, it makes sense that his creations would have some of the same deficits. He knew how to identify the traits of kindness and empathy that he was looking for in Caleb, but I don't think he has ever done more than imitate those qualities himself. It's also why Caleb is able to pull one over on him at the end, because he genuinely doesn't understand how Caleb thinks.

The hallmark of psychopaths' interpersonal relationships is that they revolve around the exploitation and abuse of others. It's true of his dynamic with Caleb, and it's certainly true of his relationships with his creations. If Ava has only known exploitation and abuse, it's not surprising that she herself would be exploitative when given the opportunity.