Ex Machina (2015) [Possible Spoilers]

Mugs_Smile said:
I actually liked it. I thought the acting was good; Caleb was obsessed and obsession can turn into dark things. He viewed Ava as a human. It might explain some of the reasons for his actions in the latter part of the movie. The genius guy was maybe a sociopath; he defiantly had a god complex. The AI's were all female because the guy who made them wanted them that way. He also liked taking them to bed. I think he actually answered that question in the movie when they were talking about why he gave the Ava sexuality. I thought of it more of a fun science fiction film. I guess it could be taken as a pseudo-intellectual one to, depending on which way you perceive it. The twists weren't that original but they did play with my emotions and raised some moral questions. The highlight for me was the directing. The suspense was great!

Bloodshade said:
I've seen so many of these movies where the creation kills the creator. On a side note the movie felt cheap. I know it was just an indie film, but that really isn't an excuse. I've seen indie films that were way more dynamic than this one.

Bloodshade said:
The guy who played Nathan doesn't fit the scientist/CEO role. I mean he looks like a college frat boy as many have said before.

Bloodshade said:
It goes against all logic that mankind would want to destroy themselves by creating something more superior then them. The very purpose of every species on this planet including humans is the will to survive.

Bloodshade said:
Nathan already knew he created true AI, so what was the purpose of keeping them locked up?

Bloodshade said:
I know he wanted to see if one could escape using there own intelligence, and that's where Caleb came in. But using Caleb really meant nothing because the AI didn't outsmart Nathan but rather Caleb himself. See what I'm saying... too many holes in the plot.

Bloodshade said:
I have a hard time seeing Nathan as a villain at the end of the movie. In my opinion he should have destroyed the AI's once he proved AI could be created. He knew it was dangerous to release these AI in the human world.

Bloodshade said:
I didn't mind that the movie was kind of open ended, because I liked things like that before. My problem is it wasn't a good open ending.

Bloodshade said:
So, what do you think happened to Caleb and Ava?

Mugs_Smile said:

I think the interesting idea that came from this was that did the creator deserve to die? I mean he basically tortured his creations. I guess I liked the moral ambiguity of it all. I didn't feel like this was an indie film. It had good production values. It's budget is too high and it didn't seem particularly artistic.


I agree on that. I mean he was super ego eccentric and likely didn't care for social conformity. It wasn't realistic.. Prehaps it was the isolation. It did make him more fun to watch. You know, the whole mad scientist kind of thing.


Like I said before, Nathan had a god complex. It fitted his character to want to do something like that.


He was a perfectionist. He wanted create the perfect race. He was going to turn Ava off at some point to discover more information/data so that he could do that.


Sure it had plot holes but that wasn't one of them. He wanted to use Caleb and Ava as pawns. He was never part of the test; he was the observer. He couldn't of used himself because he had the bias of not wanting to let the AI's free until he perfected them. He needed someone who was unaware of the situation. Caleb was picked for the reasons mentioned in the movie.


That wouldn't have fitted his character. I don't think he was a villain. He was just someone who was obsessed. This is what I mean by moral ambiguity.


How was the movie open ended? I thought the ending was pretty one sided. Perhaps I missed something.

Ava was using Caleb the whole time as a means for escape..?

Mugs_Smile said:
That's fair enough. I'm not very critical when it comes to movies. I was wondering about the pilot too. Maybe she killed him? Her fight against Nathan would suggest otherwise. I guess she somehow manipulated him. It does sound kind of weak though.

Caleb was smart but also naive. Remember how he believed he was accepted due to being the top coder at the company. Ava was created based on his personal preferences. Ava was great at manipulation. Do you remember the part where he cut himself? He thought he might have been an AI because of her. He was having an identity crisis of his own. With the way Nathan acted it was easy for me to perceive why he chose Ava over Nathan. I don't think Caleb wanted to believe Nathan when he told him about Ava's intentions. Perhaps it wasn't the most rational decision but humans aren't 100% rational creatures.

Probably something to do with the gender roles given to the AI, I haven't heard about it but it does sound silly.

Mugs_Smile said:
I actually liked it. I thought the acting was good; Caleb was obsessed and obsession can turn into dark things. He viewed Ava as a human. It might explain some of the reasons for his actions in the latter part of the movie. The genius guy was maybe a sociopath; he defiantly had a god complex. The AI's were all female because the guy who made them wanted them that way. He also liked taking them to bed. I think he actually answered that question in the movie when they were talking about why he gave the Ava sexuality. I thought of it more of a fun science fiction film. I guess it could be taken as a pseudo-intellectual one to, depending on which way you perceive it. The twists weren't that original but they did play with my emotions and raised some moral questions. The highlight for me was the directing. The suspense was great!

rpool179 said:


Agree 100%! And Oscar Isaac is an amazing actor. And LOL to the dance scene, come on Caleb dance! Lastly, holy shit I had NO IDEA MAL had a whole other forum for movies, computers, general discussions and I've an account for 2 years. Damn.

MiniSiets said:
Cannot relate to your opinion. I think it is the best movie I've seen all year. The dialogue was poignant and the philosophy didn't feel like it was info-dumped and shoehorned in to give the illusion of sophistication; it actually was all relevant to the narrative and coalesced with it in interesting ways. This is something rarely accomplished especially in contrast to writers like Gen Urobuchi, where his dialogue often just comes off as philosophical masturbation that doesn't necessarily add anything to the plot. Speaking of plot, I like that it was mainly focused on the psychology and morality of AI, unlike a lot of sci-fi movies as of late that introduce interesting sci-fi concepts but never fully flesh them out and are often just used as backdrops eventually to be upstaged by action setpieces and typical hollywood spectacle. Not that movies like Chappie and Age of Ultron are bad, but at the same time if you're going to introduce these concepts and themes, then they should actually bring something to the table besides merely being a gimmick. I mean replace Ultron with a human character and was anything of substance really lost? I would argue not really. There was nothing about his character that gave the impression that he was anything other than a human with a metal face.

Ex Machina didn't feel "cheap" at all; the special effects on Ava's body to make her look like a machine were surprisingly very realistic and believable despite the movie's shoestring budget, and the movie doesn't rely on special effects as a crutch to carry an otherwise lackluster story, but rather they are used as they should be used, which is to enhance and add to the immersion of the story. Whether or not the plot was "predictable" I suppose is pretty subjective. Savvier critics would pick up on the fact that because this is an indie movie it has more freedom to take the narrative on the path less tread, but if this were a bigger budget movie I think people would find the plot a lot less predictable because the ending chosen would be seen as a huge risk from producers and you would be expecting a more idealistic ending. Either way, however predictable the plot is, I don't think it really matters for enjoyment. Most of your entertainment value will hinge on your interest in the character interactions and the underlying psychology at play during their conversations, not the ending. If you just want to see shit blow up or if cerebral sci-fi simply isn't your thing, then it's obviously not going to appeal.

Also some random side notes:

Nathan was not supposed to be the villain. Part of what made this film again so well-written was the fact that everyone had their own believable motivations for what they did and conflict naturally followed from their differing perspectives.

If you listen to some of Alex (the director) Garland's interviews, his point in the movie was not actually to say "Don't make uncontrollable machines". From his perspective Ava was actually the protagonist. She is the sympathetic mistreated character. If you create true artificial intelligence that is not just operating on rudimentary programmed algorithms and actually thinks for itself, then what Nathan was doing without fully realizing was essentially caging a fully conscious and sentient being and treating them like an animal. Alex's message is that if technology ever reaches such a point, then these beings should be entitled to be treated with more dignity than that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tu1ajhotzj0&t=7m34s

Bloodshade said:
The reason I think people like to rate this movie high is because its different. Its not your average Hollywood film. Different isn't always better.

Bloodshade said:
The movie was over 2 hours and it felt like the camera was going in loops. One room of his house to another.