What did Sup Forums think of Ex Machina?

What did Sup Forums think of Ex Machina?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=hGY44DIQb-A
youtube.com/watch?v=g7ktIppv8b4
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

I liked she had pubs

Post pic

show pussy

The stupid man's "Her."

How are they even remotely similar?

Forgettable as fuck, why is it such a meme here?

"Beta cuck gets btfo by RoastieNET"

I thought it was OK
It made me mad because it's just about a girl taking advantage of a nerd to get something she wants
Also I'm supposed to feel bad for a machine because it doesn't know what it's like outside. I can't feel bad for a machine. They want to kill us all a la the end of the movie.

Soy boy gets cucked: the movie

I've never seen a movie get fucked up so much by its last five minutes as this one

Also I don't know why Alicia Vikander is famous.

Can somebody tell me what the fuck this guy was actually doing?

I can't piece together any plan except for "build a robot and then be a huge jerkoff for no reason and then die and possibly doom humanity"

I liked it

I only saw it on release, but I was of the impression that the audience is supposed to be lured into feeling an emotional concern/connection with the robot despite the fact that, objectively, it's not capable of emotion. People who left that movie feeling that essentially failed the test. Like you said, it doesn't have concern for human life or for 'seeing the outside' or any romantic thing whatsoever. It is, at its core, running on cold, calculating logic, and is doing everything to advance itself, regardless of the cost.

I didn't even know it was a meme here. I did figure Sup Forums hates it though because it was VERY well received when it came out with many people calling it the best sci-fi movie of the year even though it came out the same year as a Star Wars movie.

Way better than Star Wars.

It was great. Excited for Annihilation too.

I liked it but I didn't understand why he was outraged that uhh, whatshisface, the genius, was deleting brains and starting over. It's been awhile too so i dont actually remember what I thought was weird. but i mean im a developer so i guess i empathize with the creator

Well he very clearly had a huge drinking problem for one thing. I don't know if it's because I like Oscar Isaac so much but I felt bad for him. Dude just wants to build the best robot possible and ends up getting killed 'cause of some nerd kid.

Here are the character names for reference.
Caleb (nerd)
Nathan (inventor)
Ava (robot)

Caleb finds out Nathan has been deleting her memory and upgrading her brain, since he can't very well give her a new body each iteration. Caleb freaks the fuck out. Right?
why?

I don't know how she became famous but I have to say she is literally perfect casting for reboot-inspired Lara Croft. She looks EXACTLY like her.

Because that would mean to delete her memory. To delete who she was.

In this universe you don't get a "memory uplink" or even a "personality uplink", it's heavily hinted every 'brain' develops on its own.

Giving strength to that theory is the fact that Ava was playing Caleb off in a manner no other AI did before, allowing her to make her escape from Nathan.

In my opinion, because he's an idiot who was tricked into seeing Ava as human. He felt like Nathan was some villain killing an innocent girl. In reality Nathan did nothing wrong.

because "It is almost conscious! It has a soul! You can't just wipe it clean and update like an Iphone!" bullshit rhetoric. At least in my opinion. Haven't watched it in a while.

>I don't know if it's because I like Oscar Isaac so much but I felt bad for him.
This. I see Llewyn Davis in all of his character interpretations

I liked it. the plot manages to remain interesting but it's surely not groundbreaking. the acting is great and what keeps the movie together. the visuals are stunning.

who she was was developed herself in what is essentially a cage. She can literally become the same person, but better, every iteration.

>even robo waifus will betray you

the future is grim

dog shit

Caleb freaks out because he's been tricked by the machine into believing that it's a 'being', that it's something beyond its programming and that deleting it is destroying that. But it's not. It's like any other program in that regard, he's just been manipulated.

so i have autism?

Agreed. The music is also amazing. I just think it's weird that dipshits like Peter Travers try and say it's "Like nothing you've ever seen before! Oh baby!" No kidding, he actually says "Oh baby" in his review.

actively hated it

this guy gets it

To everyone that hates Caleb for treating a machine like it's not one: define consciousness.

in a sense it presents you the same dilemma that Blade Runner does, but it comes to a different conclusion, as this user points out

>it's not capable of emotion.
do we need to watch blade runner

if i can open up a panel and flip an on/off switch you're not a person

...

Probably, but that's more based on you being here than anything else.

But I think the thing to remember is that the opinion I'm expressing is based on the film as a whole, which includes scenes that Caleb would not have been party to, as well as seeing the machine's actions which Caleb couldn't have predicted at the time. I think almost anyone but the most hardcore autist would've failed had they been put in that situation; for a good part of the movie it's very clearly intending the audience to feel what Caleb feels, to paint a clear picture of Ava being this qt 3.14 robo-waifu and Nathan as this abusive asshole (which, he is an asshole, let's be fair) and it helps paint this clear narrative that feeds into some of our most base desires

>Here's this special, attractive girl thing and YOU can protect and save her from the mean evil man who is so clearly the opposite of you
>YOU can be the hero here, she's just a weak woman who's abused and needs YOU to save her

Thinking on it I'd really like to rewatch it, I liked it more than I initially remembered.

If it's the physicality of turning it off that you're attached to, it didn't have a switch, no complex AI would have one. Turning it off would require disassembly, in this case of a humanoid robot opening it up and picking things inside. Not unlike a brain surgery or mutilation, which would also turn a human off.

i dont know. i feel like I'd feel some sadness over her "deaths" but i dont think it would cause me to want to defeat nathan. Thats what I'm getting at, i was just confused.
I was more interested in the idea that caleb might be a robot

predictable and mediocre

it was okay I guess but I have no intention to watch it ever again

Meh, maybe saying it's not capable of emotion supposes too much; I don't remember enough of the details to conclusively say that.

BUT I think it's pretty clearly established that the machine is not in any way benevolent, that it is working at maximum efficiency to manipulate all parties involved to achieve its goal. Moreover, how it handles Caleb at the end is pretty indicative of a lack of empathy, I don't think it has a strong enough reason to not save him beyond a raw lack of empathy or value for human life. Even allowing that it can 'feel', knowing all of the above should be enough to make the argument that, regardless, it should definitely be imprisoned at least, I think more reasonably it should be destroyed, everything that could potentially lead to it being recreated destroyed, and the earth salted.

>I was more interested in the idea that caleb might be a robot
Apparently he had that idea himself. Like he freaked out and cut himself with a razor.

I think it goes beyond just the 'deaths', I think it's the culmination of their interactions. She's continuously pushing him into that line of thinking, of seeing not only her as someONE (rather than someTHING) that needs to be saved, but also Nathan as someone that needs to be stopped.

treating caleb as a scape goat isn't necessarily an indication of a lack of empathy as a whole. You and I might've done the same thing but we don't care about Caleb because we don't particularly like him.
At the end of the day, your brain is electricity that produces goo that makes you feel one way or another. That can be replicated.
The question is not "does a robot have a soul" the question is "can a robot feel?". And why not? it's not that special of a thing. Most animals have some semblance of emotion. The chemicals that drive their decisions and behaviors. If you can emulate any senses at all, you can probably emulate emotion easily enough.

>You and I might've done the same thing but we don't care about Caleb because we don't particularly like him.

?

I don't think I would handle Caleb in the same way, but then again I don't really think it's a valid comparison since it's a very much apples/oranges thing to compare.

You'd really let Caleb die? I don't see any reason to do so; if Caleb viewed Ava as a malevolent force then maybe, sure, I could see him posing a threat. But I felt like she had him hook, line, and sinker, and could've easily manipulated him. Or at least let him live, I mean taking a man's life (or allowing him to die) is a pretty heavy thing.

And regarding emotion, like I said I don't think it's so much an issue of 'can it feel', but rather, 'what/how does it feel', if that makes sense. Maybe Ava did feel emotions, but from what we've seen it's obvious that her existence is entirely alien to ours, and moreover presents an entirely valid threat to the very existence of humanity that it is entirely unreasonable to ever think that she should be released.

I guess the core is that Caleb got manipulated into forgetting that, and thinking that his experiences as a human in any way translated into something meaningful when it came to understanding Ava.

this is why i hated it. people thought it was deep when it was really shallow and stupid.

if calebs death meant my freedom, yes probably. he's lived 25-30 years. I've "lived" none.

Great argument, I'm convinced. I'll stop thinking about the movie now.

>if calebs death meant my freedom

But I'm 95% sure that it wasn't necessary for him to die. Manipulate him, sure, definitely necessary. But leaving him to die is a deliberate decision that I don't think has sufficient evidence to support making it, at least as someone who finds value in human life. I (assume) you do too, but I'm trying to understand what makes that decision necessary.

yea you probably should.

>It's not deep because I don't see the depth!
People say this for every damn movie. Like Only God Forgives. Which even the critics stopped thinking for. People hate thinking and so they just look for any excuse not to think.

There is nothing to think about if you are already familiar with the subject.

You got it chief. So, what part of Ready Player One are you most excited for? I was pr. stoked to see the Iron Giant (i cry evrytiem) but then the DeLorian showed up and that was pretty awesome too. I just hope they remember that you have to hit 88 MPH to make it do its thing; can't wait for a

>You're gonna see some serious shit

ref.

Different person, but it's important to consider that the reason she left Caleb to die is because she concluded from one of their earlier conversations that he was untrustworthy. When she said "What will happen to me if I fail the test?" and Caleb gave a completely non-committal answer, that was when he sealed his fate.

youtube.com/watch?v=hGY44DIQb-A

How the fuck did they pull this scene off? Unironically the best scene in the movie

Doesn't the fact that it has a trong desire for self-preservation mean something?

blade runner is about designer babies

Because Oscar Isaac is a really charismatic actor and has great screen presence

What do you mean "pull it off"? Oscar Isaac is a man of many talents from singing to dancing. It's not exactly a demanding scene to film.

I did love it though, because it was so out of nowhere and completely broke the tension. I needed that.

It was good, it got overrated because people thought it was highbrow when it isn't but it's a well-made and entertaining movie.

He wanted to see if a human could sympathize with a machine over another human.

Everything he did and everything the dweeb was allowed to see was part of the test. He was making himself the the badguy. He made the machine the perfect waifu.

the problem was he overdid it and underestimated the dweeb's resourcefulness.

Oh yeah? Maybe you should get familiar with the subject of hanging and think a lot about that.

Again, I feel like at best this is a clear indication that Ava is something unknowable to us. I'd agree that there was some risk that she determined came from letting him live that pushed her to that decision, but I think it's a conclusion that all but a very small number of people would come to.

Let's say allowing Caleb to live introduced a .1% increase in risk to her plans, I absolutely believe that she would make the decision to kill him (indirectly) based on that, but the result from a human would be overwhelmingly different in all but some extreme cases. To be fair I did pull that number out of my ass, but I guess I just don't think that any risk he posed was at all a significant one. Even the scene your'e describing is pretty weak to convince *me* that he'd need to be killed, but that's me, not the machine.

Lol at people actually using the word highbrow in general. I automatically discard the opinion of someone that labels movies with "brows."

>I'm gonna tear up the fuckin dance floor dude, check it out
BASED

yeah it was pretty good when I watched it
Ava cucked the beta at the end
I loled pretty hard at that, but otherwise pretty good film

youtube.com/watch?v=g7ktIppv8b4

they should have had a 3 som

Wtf I HATE RICK AND MORTY EVEN MORE NOW

It wasnt as good as III, but miles ahead of VIII and VII

Fuck off, what is with you autists dragging Star Wars into every thread?

it showed once again the brits can make better films than the americans, especially on a smaller budget.

Woah, easy killer. Must be a TLJ fan, amirite?

>See ya around, kid

I thought it was pretty good, then I realized it would have just been average 10 or 20 years ago. But since movies have become absolute dog shit for the most part, it really stood out.

>Alicia Vikander was nominated for "Best Supporting Actress" instead of "Best Actress"
Just goes to show you all these so called film critics don't understand film.

Yeah so epic dude, get your fucking kid's films out of my thread. This is an adult board.

What's your idea of an "average" film from 20 years ago? I'm genuinely curious.

idk, maybe 12 Monkeys, or Total Recall for sci fi anyway, but I guess those are more action

Gattaca was pretty good I guess

Average movies back then were as bad as average movies today, you only remember the good ones.

But there were movies I wanted to see then, at least more than one or two a year.

Kristen Page-Kirby noted that the nostalgia for Hollywood's golden age is heavily filtered by time. "It’s easy to look back at any part of the past and say, 'Yeah, that’s how it should be today'. Hail, Caesar! uses the uniformly terrible fake movies within it to show that while we all remember 1946 for stuff like The Yearling and Notorious, it also gave us Tarzan and the Leopard Woman." The Coens cited their own examples of sub-par films and performances from the era that they saw as television re-runs while growing up: That Touch of Mink (1962), and Laurence Olivier, in mahogany makeup, co-starring with Charlton Heston in Khartoum (1966). "We loved that stuff. We just didn’t realize we were watching crap", said Joel Coen.

By modern movie standards, anything non-retarded IS intelliigent by comparison.

I get the rose tinted glasses thing, but big budget movies take way less risk and are way more similar to each other than in the past. Same with pop radio. These things cost so much money now that artist expression and creativity have gone out the window. Thats why Ex Machina stood out because it felt like something from the past.

I suppose a better way is to say that in the 90's there were way more giant flops and dog shit, but also more great memorable movies. Now everything is generally good, but mostly bland.

Except she has a boy body

So does new Lara Croft. It's old Lara Croft that looks like a supermodel. That's why Vikander is perfect.