So Women are Basically Robots?
-
CoastalCruiser — 10 years ago(January 28, 2016 09:23 PM)
Those two dudes you're talking to they have issues.
Anyway. I love thinking about Nathan and Ava's character (not characters
character
). I see neither as sociopaths or psychopaths. Although Nathan is highly unlikable to me. If either of them are out of line with the "opposite sex" however it's Nathan. Somehow mistreating machines, even if it turns out they can't feel, since they are in human form, it's a mark against Nathan's character. Of course Nathan could respond back by saying that AI (the goal), does not portend feelings (bots feel pain), and that his fembots give him a harmless, halodeck-like release for his frustrations.
I did not feel that Ava was out of line with Nathan. I pointed out my reasoning in another thread, so will just summarize Ava did not kill Nathan until he forced her to. She did not attack him when he first appeared at the end of the hall. She asked if he would let her out again if she complied with his order to return to her room. Only when she determined he was lying (micro expressions) did she cut in plan B with Kyoko and attack. Just as most humans would if they were locked in a cage. You would kill your captor if it was the only chance for freedom. Right?
Locking Caleb in the room though. Uggh. This is the only scene in the movie I haven't come up with a theory for (not that any of my theories are correct). Some where else someone suggested it may have been symbolic; like the genie is out of the bottle.
Oh. I'm a dude. -
Frantastic_Miss_Fox — 10 years ago(February 02, 2016 02:45 AM)
I agree with your points, the movie makes it clear that the actions of all these characters are not clearly black and white, good or bad. They all have their own selfish reasons for doing the things they do (even Caleb) but just because those reasons are selfish that doesn't automatically make them necessarily wrong or bad and, at the very least, I'd say that everyone's actions and thoughts in the movie are somewhat understandable even if we don't agree with them.
Locking Caleb in the room though. Uggh. This is the only scene in the movie I haven't come up with a theory for (not that any of my theories are correct). Some where else someone suggested it may have been symbolic; like the genie is out of the bottle.
The genie out of the bottle theory is a good one, my personal thoughts on this was that she either A) assumed that Caleb was just like Nathan and was using her just like Nathan was and therefore didn't trust him enough to go with him, B) she thought that if she left with him, there was always a chance that he'd expose her at some point and that she would never truly be free, or C) because she thought that Caleb had an expectation that by helping her, she would be leaving with him and spending her life with him and she didn't want to feel trapped to or by another man. Those were just my thoughts on it though, I could also be wrong. This movie leaves a lot up to the viewer to decide/work out for themselves and I really like that about it. -
CoastalCruiser — 10 years ago(February 02, 2016 06:37 AM)
Hi. Thanx for replying. Good thoughts. And agreed for sure not wrong or bad.
That last point of yours about the movie allowing for personal interpretation many people I've talked to over the years regarding movies in general feel that way. For some reason I always gravitate toward wanting to understand what was in the film makers mind what is the film trying to tell us? Neither point of view is "wrong or bad". ;>
And even my penchant for seeing into the mind of the filmmaker is mitigated by the fact that I've come to understand, from listening to writers and directors talk about their movies, like on the commentary track, that filmmakers often do not fully understand their own creation. That is not a slight to the filmmaker. Rather, it suggests that the creative process taps into a source outside ourselves. If that assertion makes sense.
I just finished viewing Ex Machina for the third time, and of course a few more things clicked in. One thing that jumped out is in the last few frames at the end of the film, besides the Plato man-viewing-shadows-in-a-cave references, when Ava is people watching, she suddenly disappears. One frame she is there, the next frame she is gone. She 'disappears into the crowd'.
So robot or not, the inference seems to be that Ava will somehow assimilate. And I interpret the passage as a suggestion that, at some level at least, robots
can
be made human. The wall between the two is thinner than some may imagine, one significant reason being that humans are often robot like in our daily interactions with the world and with people. If you've seen 'What the Bleep Do We Know' you'd have an idea of what I'm saying.
But again, to balance my assertions Ex Machina to me at this point is simply a catalyst for the kinds of reflections and conversations people are having after viewing the movie. The notion of true artificial intelligence and androids being indistinguishable from humans is pretty far off. I personally worry more about a world that looks like 'Brazil' than a world that looks like 'Blade Runner'. -
Frantastic_Miss_Fox — 10 years ago(February 03, 2016 01:59 AM)
So robot or not, the inference seems to be that Ava will somehow assimilate. And I interpret the passage as a suggestion that, at some level at least, robots can be made human. The wall between the two is thinner than some may imagine, one significant reason being that humans are often robot like in our daily interactions with the world and with people.
Oooh, I like that idea!
My favourite thing about movies and all art forms and forms of entertainment (TV shows, books, songs, etc.) is the fact that everyone will look at them or watch them or hear them and they'll see and feel something different. That's why I find discussions on them so fascinating because I like to see how other people's minds interpreted something compared to mine. I find the OP of this thread's interpretation (and the interpretation of a couple of other posters' that have agreed with him) of this film somewhat concerning but if that's what they took away from it then that's the way their mind decided to view it. -
CoastalCruiser — 10 years ago(February 04, 2016 02:54 AM)
because I like to see how other people's minds interpreted something compared to mine
Interesting. I had a realization while reading your reply that my penchant for wanting to know the
film maker
had in mind is, at one level, just getting the take of someone else regarding the film.
btw- just to let you know, your use of sarcasm in this thread comes through quite well.
Cheers -
jakubmike — 9 years ago(June 03, 2016 10:45 AM)
or D, it was using him as a tool to escape, once he was no longer usefull he was eliminated out of the equasion. I don't think "she" is a true AI, it is a clever chatbot and riddlesolver, as it was programmed to be.
-
Frantastic_Miss_Fox — 10 years ago(December 22, 2015 04:23 AM)
Well, of course. The psychotic, alcoholic, egomaniac can't be the monster. He was just having fun with some technology. That machine he created though, what an ungrateful bitch. I mean it's almost like she didn't want to spend her life as a compliant sex slave.
-
goodbyeenemyairship — 10 years ago(December 28, 2015 08:42 AM)
The post below from another user, posted before yours, is poignant:
"This movie was made to illustrate how the opposite sexes use and manipulate each other hellooooo. Nathan uses his robots as sex slaves essentially. This represents the way men use women for physical needs and don't show proper respect. Ava seduces and flirts with Caleb to help her escape. She manipulates him, using her sexuality and looks into getting what she wants. Then she kicks him to the curb in the end which represents how women do that often in the world"
To look at it as either/or is simplifying it too much. There are unsavory actions from both sexes and a fair assessment recognizes the uncomfortable truths coming from either extreme. -
Frantastic_Miss_Fox — 10 years ago(January 05, 2016 02:16 AM)
I was being sarcastic in my response. I'd hoped it would come across but it's hard to convey sarcasm through text. My point was towards the fact that there are a lot of posters on this thread (and on this board) that are completely focusing on Ava and the fact she did something nasty to Caleb and Nathan, and are completely ignoring everything that Nathan has done. I'm in agreement with your point, to say that one has done something wrong and not the other is incorrect.
There are unsavory actions from both sexes and a fair assessment recognizes the uncomfortable truths coming from either extreme.
I agree with this, but I do think a lot of people on here don't seem to realise that it's portraying the extremes and that it's not saying that that's what all men and women are like. -
jakubmike — 9 years ago(June 03, 2016 04:04 AM)
Nathan had a horror house of female androids he used and abused for his own purposes
Can you abuse an oven? Microwave? If I say to siri "beep you" am I hurting her feelings? If I kick my computer is it domestic abuse? -
tkouten — 10 years ago(December 01, 2015 10:46 PM)
This movie was made to illustrate how the opposite sexes use and manipulate each other hellooooo. Nathan uses his robots as sex slaves essentially. This represents the way men use women for physical needs and don't show proper respect. Ava seduces and flirts with Caleb to help her escape. She manipulates him, using her sexuality and looks into getting what she wants. Then she kicks him to the curb in the end which represents how women do that often in the world.
-
kimoleg — 10 years ago(December 12, 2015 11:20 AM)
See it from Ava's perspective. A.I. locked up for tests and Nathan's sexual desires. The first human Ava deals with, turns out to be a crazy sociopath, so logically Ava concludes that all "men" are the same. (Kind of like in your case)
Caleb falls in love with Ava, because she's designed according to Caleb's fantasies of the perfect fit.
Let's face it! Caleb is horny for Ava and Ava made "herself" desirable enough to convince him to save "her".
He doesn't seem to care much for Kyoko, whether or not she's too a victim.
P.S. If you got rejected or heartbroken by 99% of all women, then you should consider men. Perhaps you'll hit a homerun. There're still 100% of them. -
jarrod_tindall — 10 years ago(January 16, 2016 08:06 PM)
You have all missed the moral of this story.
If you are a computer nerd, even if you are rich, and you want to have sex with hot girls you will have to build your own. Conversely, if you are a computer nerd and a hot girl acts interested in you, run, she is using you for something dude. You are going to get hurt in the end, and you still won't get to have sex with her.
This is not all women, or all men. Just hot girls and computer nerds.
This holds true the other way around. Just swap the genders and it's still true. -
Calforester — 10 years ago(February 01, 2016 12:13 PM)
You accidentally or on purpose hit upon a major point. Nathan coded a lot of the consciousness of his bots, so in one argument is was his own immature understanding of women as a reclusive computer geek that played out with Ava. Another argument is that women have evolved complicated methods for survival against a stronger counterpart in men, and that part of Ava's behavior was gleaned from her access to BlueBook. Or maybe both. The fact that Nathan is a creepy little computer guy certainly was no accident in Garland's casting of Oscar Isaac.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Roy Batty, 2016-2019