What you mean? Btw, film got into my list of worst films ever. Issue is that writers completely do not understand AI field, do not know even basic science.

haha....really ? after finally completely ignoring your "safe list" ...which are by and large the most mundane films made , I'll start seeing the films you don't like, as a reverse field test !

I saw it this weekend. I thought it was excellent ....because it's only tangentially about "the singularity" and really a frankensteinian metaphor, which any mythologist knows goes all the way back....and was mentioned in the dialogue...to prometheus. That's why their technique was a metaphorical scenario where only the fundamental forces as characters were involved.

As for the singularity....it asked and answered the basic question of whether we can trust ai....and I guess Caleb is still asking why he was so naive to do so !

Main issue is not all this pretense and artistic things.

Issue is that writers completely do not understand AI field, do not know even basic science.
Reality is always more interesting than wild fantasy, and much more complex.

When SIRI on your iPhone 57, says "Hey there mister, do wanna good time?" , be afraid! be very afraid! The AI in Person of Interest, unlike HAL and Colossus has no voice, but chooses Root as its analog interface with the real world. Root isn't a male fantasy inflatable doll but an ass-kicking Ellen DeGeneres. So Kubrick got it wrong in 2001, HAL should have been HILARY, a fembot party companion to Bowman and Poole, who turns into a Glenn Close/ Fatal Attraction psycho-killerbot with Wolverine blades, chasing them through the corridors of the Discovery...although that would be closer to another ALIEN.

Hey @VK , the question addresses the premise on which the film tricks us to believe it's built.

Ja ja ja I saw it Vitaliy, diligently I follow the films that you like as the ones that go through your personal guillotine =) The

And always with naked robots you can fuck (main feature!).

is spot on... nevertheless I differ on the overall assessment, I think there's a valid point, a value in the story and how it unfolds... maybe 'cause I have always been an Asimov fan, as well as sci-fi stories... like the Bible.

 
I think Ex Machina is close related to Her, another one in VK's list :P, but with different starting point's premises and thus materialization. As it is to @matt_gh2 Blade Runner and Cherry 2000... those fuckable robo-chicks wanting emancipation. And to some extent also - borrowing "quotes" and/or ambient, or just having simillar/parallel elements - to (massive derailment of) Automata, (cheap) Chappie, A.I., 2001: A Space Odyssey, (seminal) THX 1138 and grandfather Metropolis.

But IMO only in (the more cerebral, almost as if a book) Ex Machina the Turing (conscience) test, the moral laws of humanness (???), the inversion of god-human-robot roles, the pervasive relations, it's implacably explored in such a methodical, surgical and raw way. Of course there's a lot of deceivement (to the spectator and to the characters) but I don't see in it so much as an entertainment trickery as a means to deliver a message. The whole film is constructed from a anthropomorphic standpoint... that might sound ridiculously silly but as we dive into the sessions and the 4 characters... it seems clear that are the humans who should be Turing tested and surely too lost and morally lax - Caleb get to an extent where he cuts himself to check if He is a robot. There's also a suspensive shift, a perspective disbelief... at times being almost surreal and grotesque (Nathan and Kyoko's dance).

While the wild nature outside it's a restraining and insulating element it also represents all (living things) Ava wants to engage with. Different from HAL and more to the cheese than Samantha, Ava is doing what it's best for her; in a very human like behaviour (I know in this world there is a bit of everything) she is being ultimately selfish, she wants to survive, to live... and ironic enough, she has learnt that (from) humans just want to use her - very very nice strong sexual metaphor throughout the film - and get rid of her afterwards. Lying and deceiving it's something not many species can do and surely we do very well, just turn on tv and blast yourself; just look at who's in charge of the locomotive. Anyways Ava does everything necessary to get free.

Now, and coming back to passing the Turing test; if previous to Caleb's arrival Ava has been instructed to pass the Turing test as a formal sanction of intelligence and self-awareness, and supposing she's already at that consciense evolutive stage; are her actions the "absolute", machine logical results of the instructions she has been given by Nathan (the only true "demi-god" aware of possible catastrophic outcome) or a true free will? If Ava sees herself as an independent sentient being - but (thus) not a human - why does she want to mingle with humans? If there's no god, which are the limits?

What's your take at it?
 
 
PS
--- Yurenchu (IMDB user) put it very nicely:
In my view, Ex Machina is in essence a re-envisioning of the Biblical story of the creation of Man, and also a commentary on how our current science-and-technology-driven Western society has turned its back on God.

--- Which lampefeber user replies
I don't know about that. That depends on whether you refer to God as a mythical figure and a belief system or an actual being. The movie clearly showed that consciousness extends beyond the creations of God and also questioned our concept of "soul" and the boundaries of our morality.

--- To which Yurenchu replies
There are the obvious parallels between Ex Machina and the story in Genesis 1-3 or common representation of the Christian God in general:

• Nathan : the creator of a (new) mankind (God)
• Ava: the newly created mankind (Adam & Eve)
• Kyoko: a servant to the creator (a cherubim)
• the isolated tree in Ava's room: the Tree Of Knowledge
• Ava escaping from the house, into the free world: the expulsion of mankind from the Garden of Eden, into the raw free world
• Kyoko with the knife: the cherubim with the sword, guarding the Garden of Eden

The difference being that instead of God expelling his creation out of the Garden, we have Ava turning her back to Nathan and escaping.

Caleb has to fly for at least two hours "up" (= up North) to where Nathan resides (a parallel with Heaven).

Ava starting to develop a desire when she draws the tree in her room parallels the taking of the apple/fruit from the Tree Of Knowledge.

Nathan being "omnipotent" (physically strong) and "omniscient" (he sees and oversees everything).

Ava covering herself up with a modest dress and modest (short haired) wig parallels Adam and Eve covering themselves up when they discover they are naked.

Story unfolds over seven days, parallels God creating the world in seven days.

And let's not forget the word that's missing from the title: "Ex Machina" is derived from "deus ex machina".

I think Person of Interest - an American TV procedural - depicts AI far better than anthropomorphic efforts like Ex Machina. It shows alien intelligences that are all-seeing, and the humans closest to them becoming disciples to these new Gods.

Example from one of the best movies ever - Blade Runner. (Regarding human ability to create a machine that truly fools people into believing its a person, I would doubt that is possible, and I say so because humans haven't reached the point where they can explain human behavior, human thought, human emotion, human motivation fully and accurately. If those were truly understood, then maybe it would be possible to program a robot. But you first need to know what you are programming into the robot.)