The Trailer:
Director: Alex Garland
Cast: Domhnall Gleeson, Oscar Isaac, & Alicia Vikander
Synopsis: Caleb (Domhnall Gleeson), a skilled programmer, is invited to participate in an experiment in artificial intelligence performed by Nathan (Oscar Isaac).
"Wow!", initially that is all I had to say about this film upon it's closing. After a few days of letting it marinate in my mind, I have much more to add. Ex Machina is breathtaking, muted, and thought-provoking. It's unlike most A.I. films in the fact that it's not this action-packed thriller about robots taking over humans, it's a bleak look at the perhaps near future of a chess game between robot and human: it's simple, smart, and tense.
The characters are all extreme versions of their archetypes, yet still conceivable as real. For instance, Caleb is the ultimate good guy: he has a strong moral compass, he is curious, he respects others' boundaries, and he's intelligent. Due to these attributes, he is the most likable character of the film, though he does have one flaw. His flaw is his inability to detach himself emotionally from the experiment at hand, which is an unfortunate for him and a benefit to Nathan. Now Nathan is the ultimate evil scientist: he is intelligent beyond measure, he is cruel, demanding, self-indulgent, self-destructive, and is fully aware of what his creation means for the future of humanity yet created it anyway. In other words, Nathan is a douche-bag with a god complex, not a good combination. Then there's Ava (Alicia Vikander), the ultimate machine-built-to-aid-humans A.I.: she is endearing, innocent, and seemingly harmless which evokes sympathy from Caleb and us viewers as we watch here pace around her living quarters. And even though I said they're extreme archetypes, each character has some trait that grounds them in reality. I applaud all the actors' portrayals and ability to make me love and/or hate their characters with such intensity.
Ex Machina was filmed in Norway, which is absolutely gorgeous and breathtaking. The scenery is lush greenery and fresh blue waters juxtaposed against Nathan's high-tech, modern house which really hones in on the constant struggle between what was and what will be. Nathan furthers this idea when he mentions how one day A.I.'s will look back on us humans the way we look back on fossil skeletons as "upright ape[s] living in dust with crude language and tools, all set for extinction". Nature is what was and technology is what will be. Anyways, back to the setting. Aside from the gorgeous natural scenery, we have the mechanical scenery that is Nathan's house. It's high-tech, bare, grey, and somber. It is reminiscent of a prison except with art and fancy furniture. All that solemness and the sheer isolation of it makes it feel like captivity, even to us viewers. Especially since we are only ever introduced to three characters (four if you count the maid, though she never speaks), it feels like there is no other life outside of what is happening in Nathan's house. The modern house versus the stark scenery is a bizarre comparison but effective at it's multi-textured symbolism.
The smart dialogue is really what makes this a film worth watching. The questions that are posed are interesting and really made me ponder the definition of humanity and what makes a person human and if being a living organism is the only factor in determining whether something is worthy of life. There's a scene in which Ava asks Caleb what will happen to her if she fails the Turing Test (a test to determine a machine's ability to exhibit intelligence equivalent to or indistinguishable to a human's), and when he can't answer she infers that she will be shut off. She then asks Caleb why it's up to anyone and whether there is a person who will test him to determine if he should be shut off. This question has stuck with me ever since I saw the movie as it delves much deeper than simply shutting off an A.I.. It is questioning why we humans feel we have the authority to be rid of anything we want such as animals, vegetation, people. What gave us the authority to do so: an evolutionary trait of higher thinking that we've gained, or a predatory trait we've yet to rid ourselves of? In line with the Turing Test there comes a moment in the film where we wonder if we're in on the test as well; are we unable to distinguish between Ava's computer intelligence or if she does indeed possess artificial intelligence. Adding to the Turing Test conversation, there's a small discussion about nature versus nurture at some point in the film, though it's not really discussed in depth, but interesting nonetheless especially in context of a machine and its inherent nature and whether it is affected by it's environment. Sexuality is also explored in regards to Ava and why she needs sexuality or even a gender. What is the purpose of sexuality and gender in a robot? In a human? Really, every conversation within this film is something that can be discussed in depth with fellow viewers or any one who enjoys talking about such things.
Though I did thoroughly enjoy Ex Machina, there are some things about it that may be off-putting for other viewers. As I mentioned before, this isn't an action-packed thriller about A.I.'s taking over the world and I think some people, when they see a movie about artificial intelligence, want to see some intense, war-like movie with evil, and easily destroyed, robots. So this film definitely won't appeal to those who want that. Also, because of it's fairly over-done plot, there is a predictability factor. I mean, I pretty much knew more or less how it was all going to end. Though my assumptions were tested often throughout the film, my initial theories ended up being right when all was said and done. But, honestly, the cinematography, production, and wonderful script more than make up for the lack of creativity in the plot.
Overall, I love Ex Machina. It's an intelligent, subtle film that questions our authority as humans. It's beautifully shot and spectacularly acted. Plus there is a funky uninitiated dance sequence that has my heart in flutters! I have already recommended it to people who have yet to see it. Would I watch it again? Hell yes!!
!!!Spoiler Alert!!!
Okay, so as I said before, Ex Machina is predictable, so you can probably guess that Ava manipulates Caleb into setting her free and then kills him, or, rather, leaves him to die. Yup, that's what happens after an entire movie of playing she loves him she loves him not. But I have a theory as to why she does it. I don't think it was out of hatred or lack of affection for Caleb, I believe that with her very human desire to live and with her computer-like intellect, she decided that she had a higher chance of survival if she left him to die, because with him alive there would always be a chance of him exposing her or deciding she needed to be dismantled. Or she could just be a heartless robot with no sympathy for humankind! Who knows?
No comments:
Post a Comment