Early in the new sci-fi film Ex Machina, reclusive high-tech billionaire Nathan Bateman reveals
to his employee Caleb Smith that he has developed true artificial intelligence. When he suggests
it might be the greatest invention “in the history of Man,” Smith corrects him:
“It would be the greatest invention in the history of gods.”
By its very title, writer/director Alex Garland’s Ex Machina suggests divinity – in
ancient Greek theater a “deus ex machina”
is a plot twist involving divine intervention. And the Promethean – or Satanic – quest to
exercise god-like power is a major theme in this heady, well-written
thriller. In his directorial debut,
Garland, at the top of whose short resume is a writing credit for 28 Days Later, has created a film that
strives to join the pantheon of great films about artificial intelligence: 2001, Blade Runner, A.I., and Her, among others. And while Ex Machina lacks the lyricism of the aforementioned
greats, it succeeds in raising some of the same existential questions: What
makes something “human”? Are there moral limits to knowledge/technology? What
does it mean to love?
The storyline of the film is fairly straightforward. Twenty-six year old Caleb Smith, a coder at Google-inspired "Bluebook," wins an employee lottery to spend a week with the company's eccentric, reclusive genius founder for an unknown purpose. Smith is flown to the genius's Fortress of Solitude in the subarctic north (it was filmed in Norway) which we learn is a research lab for creating artificial intelligence. Smith is to be the human tester of Ava, Bateman's humanoid creation, to see if she passes the famous Turing Test of whether true artificial intelligence – and human-like self-consciousness – has been attained. As might be expected, things get complicated in the central triangle of relationships, with enough Hitchcock-like suspense to have you questioning who is good, evil, or simply a victim of someone else's self-interest.
Despite its effective use of special effects, Ex Machina is a small film that could
easily have been a stage play. For 95% of the film, there are only four
players: Nathan, played with the right mix of confidence, loneliness, and cool
by Oscar Isaac (Inside Llewyn Davis);
Caleb Smith (Domhnall Gleeson), the smart-but-naive coder; Ava, the beautiful “female” robot-creation
(Alicia Vikander, who with six more films in production is this year’s “It”
girl); and Kyoko, Nathan’s silent Japanese servant-girl (Sonoya Mizuno). The set design and art direction are very good despite an obviously limited budget.
As the character descriptions suggest, gender, sexuality,
and objectification of women are major subthemes, and have provoked
considerable debate in the blogosphere about whether or not this is a feminist,
post-feminist, or anti-feminist film. Garland tries to play it both ways with
unsatisfying results. The set-up is clearly misogynistic, with the males being
the agents of creation and control and the females existing only to serve them,
even sexually. We learn that Ava may have been designed from porn-search
preferences; and that she is designed for sex – as Nathan brags, “in between
her legs are a complex of sensors.” Nathan’s God-like omniscience – via constant
surveillance – at times suggests voyeurism, and Garland incorporates significant
female nudity in the film, though the men remain clothed. Garland tries to
redeem this through an ending (no spoilers) that could be argued as humanist,
feminist, or even cynical and portentous.
But the larger questions in Ex Machina are theological: the human quest to become as gods, what
it means to be human, and the relationship between creature and creator. In
regard to these, the film is better at raising questions than answering them.
That is not inherently bad – the same could be said of 2001, arguably the greatest science-fiction film ever made. Garland
is certainly well-read, and incorporates references, both direct and implicit,
to the myths of Prometheus and Pygmalion, the Bhagavad-Gita, Hamlet, and more. The
excellent score by Geoff Barrow and Ben Salisbury even incorporates the theme
from Close Encounters of the Third Kind
to good effect.
Its flaws notwithstanding, Garland has made a taut,
engaging, intelligent thriller. There are outstanding performances, especially
by Isaac and Vikander. Still, you can't help but wonder what this film might have been with a more experienced director. Like it or hate it, one thing is sure – you will be
talking about it afterward. 3.0 stars out of 4.0.
