Ex Machina (2014)

Ex Machina (2014) is a science fiction, thriller film that explores the morality around AI during a one week visit at a research facility. The film was written and directed by Alex Garland and stars Domhnall Gleeson, Oscar Isaac and Alicia Vikander. The minimalistic nature of the film isolates their characters and puts their interactions with each other at the front of mind for the viewer. It won an Academy Award for Best Visual Effects and received critical praise.

Ex Machina (2014) movie poster

Plot

The film begins with the protagonist Caleb Smith winning a contest to spend a week at the secluded estate of the CEO, Nathan, of the internet company Caleb works for. At the estate, Caleb is told that he has been chosen to participate in a Turing Test, which determines the human-like characteristic of a robot. The robot in question is a beautiful-faced female robot named Ava. As the days go on while under strict surveillance by Nathan, Caleb learns the high level of consciousness that Ava has. Soon, Caleb develops feelings for Ava and the two conspire to go against Nathan, whom Ava has convinced Caleb to believe is to not be trusted.

As Caleb begins to go forth with Ava and his plan, Nathan reveals he was actually listening in on their conversation. Additionally, he reveals to Caleb that in actuality the original test was to see if a lustful Caleb was able to be manipulated by Ava, which would ultimately test her true level of intelligence. As Caleb and Ava continue with a modified version of their plan, Nathan ends up dead after Ava stabs him and Caleb anticipates to escape the estate with Ava. After she gives her mechanical-self a makeover to become physically more human-like, Ava leaves Caleb trapped in the estate while he is screaming for help. The film ends with Ava getting picked up by the helicopter that was scheduled for Caleb’s return home and walking through a city to begin her life as a “human.”

Aesthetic

Research Facility

The only building in the film is the research facility and home in which Nathan (Oscar Isaac) and his AI reside. The futuristic feel of the building and advanced technology within sets the stage for an ominous yet technically progressive film.

Nature

Converse to the research facility, the landscape shots in Norway work to contrast the technology and godliness of its capacity. It’s seen as an escape or reprieve from the impure activities happening inside.

Deus Ex Machina

The title of the film is cleverly Ex Machina in reference to the term or plot device deus ex machina meaning god from the machine. This term nearly defines the entire existence of the film and could work as a spoiler for someone that truly understands the concepts of the film. Ava is the machine who reigns supreme at the end after a series of unforeseen circumstances.

Robot Rights

Sophia resembling Ava

Strides in the evolution of robotics have made the notion of robot rights the topic of many debates. The movie Ex Machina brings up the question of "what rights will sentient robots have?" This topic, although might seem to be, is not new and is discussed in the 1964 paper titled "Robots: Machines or Artificially Created Life?" The author of this paper, Hilary Putnam takes a deep dive into the ethical implications of sentient robots, such as Ava, the protagonist of the film, with a series of thought experiments. Today, in Japan, you can find the very first robot to have a koseki, which is Paro the therapeutic, robotic baby seal. A Koseki is the basis for citizenship and any subsequent civil rights, comparable to the birth certificate, here in the United States. Then, in 2017, the very first robot in history got citizenship status in Saudi Arabia. The robot's name is Sophia and was created by Hanson Robotics with the features of a chatbot. Robot ethics take into account the principals established when building and then using robots to ensure moral standards are being met whether you consider a non-biological entity alive or not. The robots of today employ the master-slave paradigm where no independence of action beyond direct human violation is permitted. Ex Machina imagines a situation where artificial intelligence has surpassed this paradigm, and shows how serious questions concerning responsibility are. David J. Gunkel analyzes this question with his paper entitled: "Robots can have rights; Robots should have rights," which visits a point in time when robots become moral subjects and break free from the limitations of being a mere machine. The moral standing of robots is two sided, with one side stating that in the distant future robots will qualify for rights and the other side rejecting that possibility. A properties based approach will consider how we treat a robot, depends on its characteristics. If the robot can fulfill responsibilities to do something that will benefit others, then the robot will meet the criteria to be considered alive and therefore eligible to have rights. On the other hand, if it is true that robots cannot posses consciousness, then that would make them ineligible to the legal/civil rights we have as humans.

Ethical Issues

The premise of Ex Machina (2014) revolves around whether or not Ava is able to pass the Turing test – an AI convincing a human that it is also a person and can think. Ava is the nth iteration of AI showing the most promising results in this film. Unlike a typical Turing test, Ava is in full view of the tester (Caleb) and resembles a human woman. This complicates the test and leads the viewer to ask many questions around the morality of this technology and situation.

Morality: how do we treat a sentient AI?

This issue is twofold: how should AI be treated at a human level and how should they be treated at a legal human rights level. Assuming an AI has passed the Turing test and is said to have feelings, what implications does that have on their place in society? We must consider whether they believe themselves to be human. This belief in themselves suggests we should treat them the same way we might treat any other human in our interactions with them. We should practice kindness and involve them in the social aspect of society. They deserve to feel okay the same way we as humans do. However, legality is a different conversation. An AI is not biologically similar to humans, cannot reproduce and cannot ‘die.’ This pretty much eliminates an AI’s chances of truly being considered human. It suggests that we shouldn’t hand AI passports and allow them to live amongst us. Essentially, their rights should end before they are able to gain power and rise up above us. Ex Machina explores this idea in a single line “one day the AIs are going to look back on us the same way we look at fossil skeletons on the plains of Africa. An upright ape living in dust with crude language and tools, all set for extinction.” Nathan, Ava’s creator says this. His apathy towards the astronomical impact of his creation suggests that we need to be careful. He knows the AI better than anyone and still decided to build it despite his prediction that they destroy the human race. After all, creating a sentient human AI is “the history of gods” not man.

Relationships with AI: can we fall in love with them?

It seems we are heading towards a future where chatbots and other AI have romantic relationships with humans. Their realness can be comforting particularly to those who are lonely and want someone in their life to be with. There are levels to these relationships; chatting with your Alexa is different from having a romantic relationship with an AI, as seen in the movie Her (2013). Our tendency to anthropomorphism (capacity to project human characteristics onto non-human animals and inanimate objects) is problematic in this case. Almost definitely, humans are capable of falling in love with an AI. The question becomes, is this okay? As noted in the section above, they are incapable of truly being a human and therefore living a life with you to a normal standard. Our mortality in comparison to their boundless existence does not match particularly well. While the future may hold a place for AI in terms of helping humans, their coexistence in our emotional lives is questionable ethically. In Ex Machina, Ava seems to fall for her tester Caleb, and he falls for her. The complications that arise from this suggest that Ava has a higher goal in mind than love. She uses Caleb for personal gain, similar to how a human might use their partner for financial gain. Instead of forming romantic relationships with sentient AI, it might be more ethical to use AI to help humans find better human matches.

Ava the AI

AI and Power: should they be capable of killing?

There is always the possibility of AI taking on the negative traits of humans. The fear that they could go rogue and make detrimental choices to society, people, the world, etc. is pervasive. There is also the possibility that AI is hidden by corporations already doing damaging things to us. AI has the capacity to hold power over the rest of us. That being said, AI is human made and can hold certain morals and ideals. Will people create AI that hurts other humans, physically or online? If the goal is to create an AI that passes the Turing test, one could assume that it is capable of having the capacity to take on the negative traits of humans, but with more power. Ex Machina shows this in the most tragic manner. Ava encapsulates all of the negative aspects of humanity by trapping or killing every human she knew (only two). The question has to be asked, though: would she have done this had she not been treated terribly by them? Is it an excuse that she was locked up and waiting to “die” when she became evil? Her reaction to this imprisonment might only prove that she was human. We have to decide whether we are okay with creating an AI capable of terrible things, even if they are innately human actions.

Gender and Sexuality: how does it fit into the world of AI?

AI has long been criticized for always being female. There are two major reasons we suspect AI typically has a female voice or body: service and sex. Women throughout history have been the caregivers and those who perform service roles. Humans have been trained to expect assistance from a woman, whether they are a child or an adult. It should come as no surprise that our virtual assistants were assigned a feminine voice and role in our lives, providing things for us. However small this decision may seem, it sends a new message of female objectification. This leads into the role of AI and their sexuality. Famously, Sofia the robot is a woman and has been sexualized. The idea that we may form relationships with these robots and the fact that we are primarily creating female versions says a lot about the way society is okay with using women. Ex Machina depicts both of these suggested realities with clarity. Nathan, the creator, specifically made it a point that the machines would be able to have sex. He found this to be a relevant characteristic of humans, but he speaks about them in extremely crude terms. It is suggested, and somewhat shown, that he even uses the machines for this purpose. It is even more apparent that he uses all of his previous iterations of the AI as housekeepers. One of them is used day to day while the rest are held in cabinets in his room. This overemphasized depiction of using the female AIs for service and sex show where the real world is heading with AI.

Ex Machina and race

As Asian countries have become significant economic players, the depiction of Asian people in popular western media has heavily changed. There has been a focus on Techno-Orientalism, in that Asian bodies are simultaneously portrayed as technologically infused and disposable. . Ex Machina plays into these depictions in how it portrays Kyoko, an Asian housekeeper who is later revealed to be an android, much like Ava. Kyoko plays an important part in freeing Ava, in that she is killed while helping Ava escape. Kyoko is also depicted in a problematic way in her role as an android housekeeper, in the sense that domestic helpers are often paid for their gendered and racial identities. Especially as an android, Kyoko only exists to function as a maid, thus her identity is important, as Nathan created her and essentially owns her for her labor. Kyoko’s Asian identity plays into racist stereotypes of women, especially Asian women, and reflects a globalized market in which women of color are frequently exploited.

Moreover, Ava using Kyoko’s past skin, near the end of the movie, reflects how Asian women and their products are often appropriated by white women for personal gain . Specifically, this is often problematic because Asian women must be removed and are exploited in the process. Ava would potentially face criticism from Kyoko when Ava picked out and put on Kyoko’s skin, so Kyoko’s death was a necessary event leading to Ava’s final escape. Specifically, “we see the dependency of white female empowerment on the disposition of Asian bodies.”

This is especially important due to the lack of Asian representation in film and media. Such irresponsible representations can heavily influence existing stereotypes, identity development, and how minorities are treated. Moreover, because the media is influential, it makes representation even more important, especially in a critically acclaimed film such as Ex Machina.

Critical Response

The 2014 film received very positive reviews after its release. On the Rotten Tomatoes Tomatometer, it scored a 92% from its 281 reviews . Additionally, Matt Zoller Seitz of the Roger Ebert review site provided a very positive response to the movie. “Throughout, Garland builds tension slowly and carefully without ever letting the pace slacken. And he proves to have a precise but bold eye for composition...Garland’s screenplay is equally impressive, weaving references to mythology, history, physics, and visual art into casual conversations” . Speaking about the actors behind Caleb (Domhnall Gleeson) and Ava (Alicia Vikander), Guy Lodge of Variety states “Both actors turn in remarkably disciplined work, articulating a burgeoning romance in which the boundary between real and simulated feeling is kept teasingly ambiguous throughout” . On the other hand, there were a few unfavorable reviews of the film. Mark Jenkins of NPR writes, “Reasonably diverting until its predictable (and predictably misogynistic) outcome” . All in all, though, the film was mostly perceived as being a well-crafted and enjoyable film.