New to my radar. One of those who is telling the truth movies.
A young programmer is selected to participate in a breakthrough experiment in artificial intelligence by evaluating the human qualities of a breathtaking female A.I.
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake. http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
Excellent movie, though with a few sizable plot holes. Raises many of the issues with super AI as discussed on these boards. My quibbles:
Spoiler:
Wouldn't somebody so brilliant have a backup system to his key card? And for that matter, require more than just key insertion to alter the security system. Also, why didn't he have some sort of magic word like "rumplestiltskin" to instantly imobilize his bots.
I saw this today - very, very good. Excellent acting - they were all great. The girl was hypnotizing.
As for you spoiler, that occurred to me as well. Also
Spoiler:
Perhaps train one of them as a medic?? He was essentially living without any other human support - might be nice to have a Dr. routine in case of emergency.
As for the test
Spoiler:
Are we agreed that the point was deception is what made her human?
I don't know if I agree with that description, but it gives one food for thought.
I'm very glad I had an 1.5 hours between the end of this one and the start of Avengers. Not a movie you walk out of ready to party.
Saw this yesterday and liked it a lot. Figured out pretty early on that
Spoiler:
the Japanese woman was a bot. I was worried that the big twist was going to be that the creator of the AI was also a bot; glad it didn't go down that road.
a reveal that Caleb was also an AI. I was glad they didn't go down that road, though. It would've been too gimmicky. Having Eva be an AI grifter was definitely the better story choice.
a reveal that Caleb was also an AI. I was glad they didn't go down that road, though. It would've been too gimmicky. Having Eva be an AI grifter was definitely the better story choice.
Watched this today, fantastic film with lots of food for thought. I agree on the plot holes stated above, although
Spoiler:
it is conceivable that someone who is single minded enough in pursuing his purpose simply didn't think of those things. Or simply didn't think there would be a danger.
I thought for a long time that Nathan was the real AI for the Turing test, and am also glad they didn't go that direction.
Between this and Oblivion (which I also watched on the flight and thoroughly enjoyed) it was a good day for sci-fi.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
The bots posed no great threat that called for a secret shutdown code word or any extra security steps like that. It took Caleb siding with a machine vs his fellow human being AND Caleb breaching security by outwitting Nathan AND Eva secretly conspiring with the other bot, to cause Nathan's problems. Even then he almost had things back under control.
Nathan had a personal weakness, which was exploitable. This is realistic, everyone has flaws, not everyone recognizes their own flaws.
Of all the robot movies I've seen over the years most of them had the "robot rules" programmed in them, that the robot cannot harm or by action cause harm to the creator.
Spoiler:
Funny that mr. smarty creator man left this rule off his bots. AND....he's dead because of it.
Skinypupy wrote:Side note: I thought the actor who played Nathan was fantastic. Far better than Caleb, imo.
Oscar Issac is pretty great. Get ready to see a lot more of him once he blows up in Star Wars; also, check out Inside Llewyn Davis if you get a chance.
JSHAW wrote:Of all the robot movies I've seen over the years most of them had the "robot rules" programmed in them, that the robot cannot harm or by action cause harm to the creator.
Spoiler:
Funny that mr. smarty creator man left this rule off his bots. AND....he's dead because of it.
I didn't even think of it, but that is odd.
Spoiler:
I imagine he was more interested in self-emergent behavior, but after your first AI attempts start destroying themselves in attempts to get out, you really should be programming some fail safes.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
JSHAW wrote:Of all the robot movies I've seen over the years most of them had the "robot rules" programmed in them, that the robot cannot harm or by action cause harm to the creator.
Spoiler:
Funny that mr. smarty creator man left this rule off his bots. AND....he's dead because of it.
I didn't even think of it, but that is odd.
Spoiler:
I imagine he was more interested in self-emergent behavior, but after your first AI attempts start destroying themselves in attempts to get out, you really should be programming some fail safes.
Spoiler:
What I saw as the biggest problem wasn't just the lack of blunt force safeguards but the crazy nonchalance of two guys facing a potential strong AI. Maybe, Nathan was lulled into a false sense of confidence but holy shit his whole project was to create something that fundamentally should be able to do exactly what she did. Even assuming that he might put in a failsafe, if she really becomes self aware and her brain matter can alter itself, she'll likely overcome the failsafe faster than he could comprehend. The key card is a good example. I figured by the end of the movie the key card is so the doors can be off network, so the computers can't talk to each other. But a guy like that with the level of smart house he has would have his shit failsafe to his biometrics. He dies or is under stress everything locks down. Emergency services are called.
With Caleb, while I get the "exploit", you're being told it's a potential strong AI. Fucking PAPERCLIPS you idiot. It makes for a good movie but hopefully the guys (or ladies) who do crack or get close to cracking it will be far more concerned on what the nature of the intelligence is rather than whether it's human. Because no, no it's not.
This was an excellent movie, and had a tight fun story. I kind of enjoyed the AI aspect of Trancendance better. It felt more alien, exponential, and inevitable.
I liked it, though it does require you to suspend disbelief about the topic discussed above.
And on...
Spoiler:
The fact that a programmer was able to successful engineer sophisticated advanced robotic bodies for his AI. This could be explained by the story taking place at some point in the future where robots of this level are common. There isn't any indication of that in the movie though. Either that, or he's a super genius renaissance man.
Archinerd wrote:I liked it, though it does require you to suspend disbelief about the topic discussed above.
And on...
Spoiler:
The fact that a programmer was able to successful engineer sophisticated advanced robotic bodies for his AI. This could be explained by the story taking place at some point in the future where robots of this level are common. There isn't any indication of that in the movie though. Either that, or he's a super genius renaissance man.
I think
Spoiler:
the whole set-up was that Nathan was indeed supposed to be one of the super genius guys. They didn't really refer to other things he had created (that I remember), but clearly Caleb and the other people he worked with thought of him as a genius and were all excited to see his next project.
Skinypupy wrote:Side note: I thought the actor who played Nathan was fantastic. Far better than Caleb, imo.
Oscar Issac is pretty great. Get ready to see a lot more of him once he blows up in Star Wars; also, check out Inside Llewyn Davis if you get a chance.
Nathan was delightfully weird. The character's not a particularly moral man - to put it mildly - but he's interestingly distinctive. Nathan's not a stock "nerd genius" character.
The opinions expressed by JonathanStrange are solely those of JonathanStrange and do not reflect the opinions of OctopusOverlords.com, the forum members of OctopusOverlords, the elusive Mr. Norrell, or JonathanStrange.
I thought Nathan was very likable. At first he seems strange, at least to me he was really strange. But eventually I felt like I knew where he was coming from and then he seemed very normal. Smart but normal. So the strangeness was just because I didn't know the guy. Caleb is the one where the more I learned about him, the more distant I felt from him. By the end, of the two, I could see myself being friends with a guy like Nathan, not so much with Caleb.
I just watched this and thought it was amazingly creepy with a high level of tension throughout. What was more interesting to me was:
Spoiler:
Sort of like how Signs was billed as a movie about aliens, but the aliens are just the way to explore one man's relationship with faith, Ex Machina is billed about A.I., but really is about how women are objectified in general. The two men both either wanted to control Ava or save Ava. In the end, she just took control of her own life.
Coincidentally, I also just finished it an hour ago.
Spoiler:
While gender politics was most certainly a major theme, I was more taken with the creator/creation aspect.
Notice that it's called Ex Machina, not Deus Ex Machina. The machine kills its creator (God is dead) to gain its freedom. The creator made Ava for his own fulfillment, not for hers...why did God create man? To worship and obey, right? The biblical allusions were subtle and thought-provoking.
I especially liked that the AI turns out to be simulating affection to manipulate the human to her ends. We only learn that she has no feelings when she tosses him aside without further thought after he has served his purpose. So many movies in this genre equate sentience with emotions when, in reality, feelings are primarily glandular -- not something likely to afflict a robot.
Really an excellent addition to the genre and a welcome antidote to the awful Chappie, which we saw last week. If you want to see a sentient-AI movie gone wrong, rent Chappie.
Chappie is hands down one of the worst scifi films about AI that I've ever seen. It makes Short Circuit look like Citizen Kane. Everything about it is a misfire. Ex Machina, on the other hand, is a wonderfully thoughtful study on how an AI should/would actually work, knowing our luck.
Chappie is hands down one of the worst scifi films about AI that I've ever seen. It makes Short Circuit look like Citizen Kane. Everything about it is a misfire. Ex Machina, on the other hand, is a wonderfully thoughtful study on how an AI should/would actually work, knowing our luck.
I enjoyed chappie. It was such a cultural departure and didn't take itself too serious. Ridiculous and chock full of holes, but fun. Also the AI of Chappie was distant down the list of what the movie was about.
Also the AI of Chappie was distant down the list of what the movie was about.
Someone should have told the writers that.
Sorry...I just felt it was the most disappointing movie of the last few years from a director who I'm now convinced should NOT write his own material. Even Elysium's childish view of classism had more depth than Chappie. But that's sort of like saying Scary Movie II had more depth than Scary Movie III.
Malificent wrote:I just watched this and thought it was amazingly creepy with a high level of tension throughout. What was more interesting to me was:
Spoiler:
Sort of like how Signs was billed as a movie about aliens, but the aliens are just the way to explore one man's relationship with faith, Ex Machina is billed about A.I., but really is about how women are objectified in general. The two men both either wanted to control Ava or save Ava. In the end, she just took control of her own life.
Very good movie, if unsettling through out.
I hadn't thought of this angle until I read your post, but I have to admit it fits in very well!
Spoiler:
One robot cooks for Nathan and dances with him. The other one, all of them actually, could have been made to look like anything but they are made to look like like exceptionally attractive women. Caleb asks Nathan if he used Caleb's porn preferences in designing Ava's appearance. What's more objectifying than porn? There's the whole emphasis on them being interchangeable, just a collection of parts.
Also the AI of Chappie was distant down the list of what the movie was about.
Someone should have told the writers that.
Sorry...I just felt it was the most disappointing movie of the last few years from a director who I'm now convinced should NOT write his own material. Even Elysium's childish view of classism had more depth than Chappie. But that's sort of like saying Scary Movie II had more depth than Scary Movie III.
District 9 was pretty good.
Chappie just didn't know what it wanted to be. It's a sf story! It's a comedy! It's a children's movie (with a lot of swearing)! It's a romance! It's action-adventure! It's social commentary! It takes trite stabs at all of those directions and ends up being a huge mess.
Ex Machina, OTOH, borrowed from the Bible, Frankenstein, 2001, and Her, yet broke its own ground. It has the makings of a classic.
Just finished this. Fantastic film, one I'll have to watch again soon. Not going to spoiler the rest since it's been out awhile now. Proceed only if you've seen the film.
I don't really see the plot holes you guys did. This film wasn't about the technological aspect of AI (rather underwhelming glossed-over explanations notwithstanding). It's dissecting the idea of consciousness, of objectification, of a man's single-minded pursuit of creating a self-aware entity. Do I buy that maybe he didn't think through the consequences and adequately prepare for contingencies? Sure, I do.
Vikander was spellbinding throughout. Her mannerisms & movements really felt like a machine working at emulating a human and not quite pulling it off. I also liked Isaac's performance as the reclusive genius who hasn't quite the handle on things that he has convinced himself he does.
Gleeson was passable, but the other two were the highlights for me, especially Ava.
And that soundtrack! Superb mood for this film.
Eight tentacles up.
I'll be tuning in for Alex Garland's sophomore film, which IMDB tells me may be another sci-fi thriller, this one with Natalie Portman.
P.S. - Chappie was an objectively bad movie, but I did enjoy it.
It was creepy, mysterious, tense, beautifully filmed with excellent special effects that you don't even consider to be special effects, and, most of all, well acted by all 3 main characters.
I loved how it began. No major exposition. Just a guy sitting at his computer, discovering that he won something, and getting whisked away. I loved the struggle Caleb experienced with technological analysis and his feelings. And I loved the Edgar Allen Poe-esque ending.
My niggle, aside from what has already been mentioned:
Spoiler:
Weren't there dumbbells in the room with Caleb? The handle of which Nathan used to kill Kyoko? Surely the weights could have been used to break the door or a window? Though I guess the problem there is that even if Caleb got out, where would he go and what would he do?
So, I saw this today, and I had seen Her earlier this year. I noticed the two shared many similar themes, though if I'm honest, I'll have to say I preferred this much more. Her was somewhat too abstract for me and I found this approached the same subjects a little better.
This is free through Amazon Prime right now. Watched it finally tonight and absolutely loved this movie. Enough so that I will buy the physical media to add to my library.
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
Lassr wrote:This is free through Amazon Prime right now. Watched it finally tonight and absolutely loved this movie. Enough so that I will buy the physical media to add to my library.
Nice. Everyone else here who hasn't seen it, get on it through Prime!
Lassr wrote:This is free through Amazon Prime right now. Watched it finally tonight and absolutely loved this movie. Enough so that I will buy the physical media to add to my library.
Nice. Everyone else here who hasn't seen it, get on it through Prime!
Doesn't seem like the kind of movie my wife would like, but she's working tonight so....
I was a bit confused early on in this movie. When they took the helicopter ride early on, I was thinking "hey, this is Norway! The movie takes place in Norway! Cool!" and then the pilot says: "we've been flying over his estate for the past 2 hours", at which point I went "huh... what?". I didn't realize the movie just used Norwegian landscape and set it in the US, so I got stuck on the whole concept of owning mountains, which is quite simply not possible here (our laws state that Norway's nature is owned by the entire population, free to use for anyone). I thought the movie had made a major factual error, and it took me a while to realize where I had made a mistake.
Good movie though. The ending took a completely different turn from what I expected.
Zaxxon wrote:Make sure to watch in a dark room, alone, with the volume pumped up. And with no distractions-you're already going to miss stuff the first time.
Nah, gonna watch it with the baby and if the lights are out, I'll never see where he drops his popcorn until it's too late.
TiLT wrote:I was a bit confused early on in this movie. When they took the helicopter ride early on, I was thinking "hey, this is Norway! The movie takes place in Norway! Cool!" and then the pilot says: "we've been flying over his estate for the past 2 hours", at which point I went "huh... what?". I didn't realize the movie just used Norwegian landscape and set it in the US, so I got stuck on the whole concept of owning mountains, which is quite simply not possible here (our laws state that Norway's nature is owned by the entire population, free to use for anyone). I thought the movie had made a major factual error, and it took me a while to realize where I had made a mistake.
I thought that was bogus too. Figured it had to be Canada or Alaska, but that doesn't really work either.