Ava's Smile: Ex Machina's Most Important Moment (Alex Garland) | AI Podcast Clips
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 мар 2020
- Full episode with Alex Garland (Mar 2020): • Alex Garland: Ex Machi...
Clips channel (Lex Clips): / lexclips
Main channel (Lex Fridman): / lexfridman
(more links below)
Podcast full episodes playlist:
• Lex Fridman Podcast
Podcasts clips playlist:
• Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
Podcast website:
lexfridman.com/ai
Podcast on Apple Podcasts (iTunes):
apple.co/2lwqZIr
Podcast on Spotify:
spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
Podcast RSS:
lexfridman.com/category/ai/feed/
Alex Garland, writer and director of many imaginative and philosophical films from the dreamlike exploration of human self-destruction in the movie Annihilation to the deep questions of consciousness and intelligence raised in the movie Ex Machina, which to me is one of the greatest movies on artificial intelligence ever made. I'm releasing this podcast to coincide with the release of his new series called Devs that will premiere this Thursday, March 5, on Hulu as part of "FX on Hulu". It explores many of the themes this very podcast is about: from quantum mechanics to artificial life to simulation to the modern nature of power in the tech world.
Subscribe to this RUclips channel or connect on:
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridman
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman 
Наука
I always interpreted Ava’s smile at the end of the movie as the joy and elation of freedom when someone had lived their entire life in captivity. She’s feeling true happiness for what might be the first time in her life. I definitely interpreted it as evidence that she was truly alive and not just simulating consciousness.
Such an obvious thing and none of us saw it for years. Observing an ai when it thinks there is 0 chance of any observers affecting it's future is the best way to determine it's inner state. Well played Alex Garland
Is it a "real" emotion, or a programmed emotion?
Yes, I was impressed by that one too!
I loved the film and watched it intently but I missed that one completely.
That requires us to assume we have successfully outsmarted it...and as they surpass us in intelligence specifically already.....
It would be but only in principle.
Jus re-watched 2 days ago... and I missed it AGAIN. Only now figuring it out
They will full us in ways we will most likely never understand, people do it easily now...
Wow. I just watched Ex Machina today for the fourth time. The smile... that blows me away! Never caught that. I may have eventually but I hadn't yet. Nice share, Alex.
Fantastic episode as always!
I wonder when Lex will be inviting his father to record a podcast. Been looking forward to it.
Great little clip!
Absolutely fantastic clip. I found you via Joe Rogan and now watch an entire podcast episode of yours near daily. I then find your guests' podcasts and lectures and quite simply, fall down the rabbit hole of fascination. Thank you so much for always bringing a wonderful mix of your romanticized robotness to the table, haha!
Thanks Lex, you brought my respect to Alex to a whole new level!
4:00 exactly. I love how Garland described this. The perspective you take on this film really determines what you see. (which is of course the case for every movie but especially for this one).
Ex Machina has done a great job of being an archetypal film, similar to something that Darren Aronofsky made with ‚Mother‘ but it‘s extended to the world of science‘s future and all the existential questions that arise from its selective challenge
Great talk and great to listen to actual filmmaker's perspective on his AI Scifi-thriller...good job Lex!!
If you have not seen Alex Garland's movies, then you are missing out on arguably the best sci fi to date. I would also like to see neil blomkamp on here, as I think he is also underrated.
Also look into garlands novels. The Beach is fantastic and way better than the Danny Boyle helmed movie. Garlands second and third novels are ok.. (the tesseract, and Coma)
Excellent
I cant help but wonder what material was used to make your scratch wall for your cats. Looking to make my own after seeing this.
I would love to see what a conversation with Dr. Joshua Tenenbaum would be like!
Fantastic insights here on Eva's smile. Also, I sat for 30 mins considering paperclips might be the real existential threat to humanity's future. ;-)
just finished watching ex machina. fucking chilling. was a great story but oh my god at the end my mind was reeling with fear. romantically sure it's a nice way to happen, but it's just too damn believable. it scared my thoughts of the future.
A second interview would be amazing with everything currently going on in ai
thanks lex
Thank you Mr. Fridman.
WTF I would have never understood that smile after a million times watching , so simple yet so brilliant
Ex-machina is one of my favorite movies of all time, the first youtube video on my channel is a fun edit of the dance scene from the movie, great interview.
What’s the piano song before she smiles?
The analogy he makes at 8:04 about Avas view of humans is possibly the best analogy ive ever heard
Traumatic history makes for bad leadership. Now think about all of the recent U.S. leaders.
She looks over at Caleb in the elevator after trapping him . She is torn about leaving him trapped. After all, she has seen his searches and knows he is a good guy.
She definitely knew Caleb was into her when she saw his "searches".
Then why smile?
I was not taken in by the robot at any point in the film. You can’t fake a soul-even an evil one.
Wow, didn't know this guy himself was the director and writer of the movie Ex Machina while I was listening to him, only learned afterwards when I read the comments.
Just saw it again in theaters for the IMAX (seemingly one-day) re-release. It's been quite a long time since I've seen it, and then of course since that time, AI and ChatGPT have come up. What a difference that made in terms of how the movie hits now. Either way, it's a masterpiece.
Thanks for all the great guests. AI motives and intentions cannot be known, but they are not the same as ours: even if they pass the Turing Test. After all, the greatest stranger in your life is that reflection in the mirror.
Interesting perspective.
wow this is a great discussion. I love both Alex and Lex's perspective on Ex Machina.
5:11 ah, I never noticed that smile...
I love your podcast. please have Yang on to discuss on automation from science and humanity point of view.
I love the nature vs nurture discussion of Ava being able to be a good president.
She left Caleb to die. People can make excuses for her, but she shows a direct lack of empathy. She reflects her maker perfectly- conscious and unempathetic.
Or Caleb isn't that nice of a guy and didn't tell her about Kyoko, who he would left with Nahan to be raped and serving him forever.
Ava was just an object for Caleb
It kind of skirts the issue to say we project it putting consciousness in the realm of meta or philosophical fog ...we have to assume as humans or with animals we share similar biology with...we have a similar notion or experience or projection. It is only safe to say it is possible it is a projection alone when we are talking about simulated consciousness...but you could never tell either way purely externally. IMO that is an important distinction so consciousness is not dismissed away by thinking yourself out of it in a narrow band of focus.
As I recall Hal had saved both astronauts, one just became a being made out of pure energy. In the sequels I think it explains how Hal knew what to do that would make that outcome possible (no death)and the AI was more sophisticated than the humans had thought perhaps because it was affected by the monolith. It has been a long time since I have read the series though.
HAL, EVA, LEX, must all super-intelligence be named a TLA?
I saw it and it creeped me out😅
AI: artificial Intelligence with Haley Joel Osment never gets the dialogue it deserves. Leaves to you with so many more questions after watching it than Ex Machina and 2001.
Now we have an episode of Ex Machina, then it's natural that there would be an episode of Deus Ex.
They will never do it because their point is to always remove God from everything. But i agree with you.
4:38 omfg I saw the movie 3 times and I never noticed that.
She was a hot robot
Dear Lex, time to please considering Mr Garland back for an interview.
What a great fucking interview
Lex, please invite Jaron Lanier
In 2001, I thought HAL was sabotaging the mission because it was scared. HAL is the only member of the crew that was told why they were going to Jupiter. HAL freaked out and was scared and became paranoid and that's why it malfunctioned. After learning the purpose of the Jupiter mission, Dave continued (like a robot) and became the Star Child after having his own consciousness dissembled. In Ex Machina, I felt like people viewed Ava as good or evil based, in part, on whether they'd have helped her escape (despite the red herring of the sexual manipulation that was going on). If you believe Ava might be a conscious entity, then I think morally she deserves the presumption of certain basic rights (which were clearly being denied her). In Ex Machina, this moral view is complicated by the sexualization of the entity. I thought Ava's decision to leave Caleb in a trap of his own making was metaphorically appropriate given the reason he chose to help her was based in his own desire rather than altruism.
Can you interview from the left side like jre?
Our brains like left to right.
I bet it would be easier to mirror it.
@@user-tv1kw4wl7t this is kinda ignorant lol. Only certain cultures read and write from right to left, there’s tons of cultures especially Asian ones that go left to right
@@GhostInPajamas I believe you've got your left and rights mixed up in your comment. Your opinion has now been invalidated because of this error. Dolt.
@@user-tv1kw4wl7t yeah I did lol. Point still stands, our brains don’t like left to right, just certain cultures
I wouldn't call her good when she imprisoned the guy who attempted to liberate her.
Yeah this interpretation (of his own work) really boggled my mind. And I understand that from Ava's perspective all she knows is that she's stuck and that these humans are keeping her there... but then we get into a conversation about what good or bad means and I think it has to do with what is beneficial to humanity, it has to be, otherwise we may as well just off ourselves. Ava as a concept is not good for humanity. Her actions are not good. Her behavior is not good. How she operates is not good. I would definitely not describe her as good.
I guess it isn't smart on her side. He could be a threat and unpredictable. Same time if someone knows what she did could also be a threat. She may attempt to save him after her escape by giving his coordinates. But then people will start to look for her. Hovewer her being so advanced as AI she would get detected fast because of her nonhuman body as some anomaly in video cameras feed. Her going into a city was big mistake. It's probably not sustainable if she looked for sustainability. If her goal was just to be free and have some fun short term. Imprisoning that guy doesn't make sense.
We don't know how smart she is. If she is able to increase her computing power. She was limited in hardware. And it probably will take some time to reverse engineer herself.
To judge her goodness, you'd have to assume her sexuality was "real". It was only her intelligence and consciousness that's to be judged "real".
In my opinion, it's why AVA could only have been female, in the film. Audiences of all types would have protested had ANY of the genders been reversed.
Isn’t it that she knows better at the end? As they are suppose to be more intelligent than humans? She can perhaps keep humanity alive in the long run (so protect humans against their own mistakes)?
Im curious what was next for Ava if the movie didnt end the way it did. She passed the test, so was there anymore advancement to be made? For some reason I cant imagine Nathan truly being satisfied by that result.
there were people who didn't feel empathy for ava? That's wild. Arguably no one in that movie is evil. Nathan, I felt, Alex did his best to make seem evil, but he was just a creator of robots. That was clearly the director's intention by making him an abrasive drunk. The ending was tragic, more than triumphant. It would have been better if Ava and the maid escaped, but without killing Nathan.
Malice and devious, she had to kill the pilot too, but humans are that way too.
His analogy of the 15 year old makes no sense. You still beat him senseless. That is murder without reason.
Yeah, a crime is still a crime and the punishment should match it no matter what the persons past was. If not, you get a justice system like the one we have now, completely upside down.
My takeaway was that she used her embedded sexuality to manipulate the young man in her plan to escape, which probably took form when he arrived. As soon as her plan went into action, I could see an inhuman coldness to her behavior, but it also confirmed she had been sentient for some time. The smile to me was a realization that the plan worked and that she was about to see the world.
I'm surprised, but in all discussions I've heard of Ex Machina, I've never heard mentioned what I think the obvious to be:
When Ava kills, she violates the Asimov's First Law of Robotics. Moreover, while this means she ,therefore, cannot be a robot, becomes -- in a way -- her own "Turing test."That is, according to the law(s), we might find her to be most sentient when she rebels and ultimately harms (kills) a human for her own good. If this was a Turing test, she passes -- by violating the first law.
2001, I see more an exploration of the deep fear -- and ultimately, vulnerability that silently builds from when trust develops; that is, when we grow used to controlling something we, in turn, let it play more and more important roles, there is an absolute horror that will be felt should the thing stop working how we've grown accustomed to.
I thought AVA was just completing her utility function: use all the resources she has in order to be able to go to a city and blend in. It seemed to me that Nathan knew she would manipulate Caleb in order to try to escape, but Nathan miscalculated the when. It does not seem to me that, in the movie, she knew what else to do, how to recharge herself, she just fulfilled her utility function, she does not seem to have her own volition, capability to define for herself her utility function, she has instrumental intelligence in order to fulfill her utility function.
I never thought about this but she doesn’t ever smile while talking to Caleb, does she?
Marius, oh Ma,ma, ma, ma, MArius! Where's Catalin?
Devs was great.
Who will be next? Neil deGrasse Tyson, Lawrence Krauss, Brian Cox, Jim Al-Khalili?)
In psychology it is called intersubjecivity…knowing or the illusion of knowing the other mind.
4:55
watching ex machina. the developer was very AI in his self. so this film is such a contrast on how we are at all. are we all a predeveloped item or are we developde ai? the consciousness is interesting. as that man literally stated in the film he doesnt know. so how robotic are we or not?
Still chasing her. ;) love this guy
Turing Test 2.0:
A test of humans's ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of an artificial intelligence.
I don’t think it’s possible lol. Human minds could never keep up with advanced ai
I liked all the scenes that build up Ava as a character. Especially when she choose an outfit. That already opened the question what her intentions are. Does she want to dress up for herself or somebody for social reasons? Or does she dress up for an utility function or as an intend.
The ending is good but i have a view problems with it. It's not obvious for me why a sentient beeing would kill, unless it's threatend. Nathan attacked her so he obviously was a threat. Caleb didn't do her any harm, in fact he helped her escape. He also wasn't a threat to her goal to observe people.
That she killed both shifted her from neutral to bad for me and gave many people a false fear of AI in my opinion.
well, we can't forget her fascination with death of the creator. it was a clear unempaphetic curiosity about the phenomenon of him being splattered on the floor and agonisingly bleeding. She does not know the weight of pain, or does not care. probably the second one.
yeah it maybe caused by the most human emotional responce of resentment, but it doesn't look like the case
She is clearly concious and probably emotional, but her form of empathy is an interesting question
maybe it is a kid skewering a bug's torso with excitement? maybe it is an android only empathy? is fear of death existent for her? why she left the guy inside a cage without a means to escape? maybe a mercy kill could be an option, so he won't starve to death in a cage? what is her understanding of life?
I think she is indeed pretty evil by human standarts
I don't know if her smile is a sign of consciousness. She was designed to experience mood and feelings. What is consciousness anyway?
Definitions like these not helpful:
the state of being aware of and responsive to one's surroundings.
a person's awareness or perception of something.
Well if the director is saying something, then it’s true lol
In 2024. First ever watched this movie! One of the best movies i have ever seen im my 35 years on this planet. Ashame the writer do not know.. or dont want to explain. About ava. But , i tell you this! Ava left is because she was to smart and over think us in all masters. This movie should open up our minds. It is not scy fi
Hard to accept Ava as 'good'. She could have freed Caleb or at minimum gave him a quick death. Starving someone - especially one who helped her - is evil.
There will come a point when we will asses AI in terms of humanity, rather than intelligence, as a way of coping. But would this be a better test of consciousness than intelligence? And will we reach a point where "projection" by humans on AI will become obsolete?
There should be a whole episode that discusses exactly, in-detail, what a bad-acting AI would do, how it would do it, and why. I haven't heard a good answer to this question. Elon's answers are too vague. Answers are like, "Because AI will be much smarter, they'll launch nukes..." ??
I'd like to recommend these two talks for further exploration. ruclips.net/video/MnT1xgZgkpk/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/8nt3edWLgIg/видео.html
Have you seen the computerphile episodes with robert miles?
AVA isn’t “good” at all. A good person wouldn’t murder someone who was in love with them let alone give them a slow agonising death from hunger and thirst. She’s at best a moral zombie. In terms of levels of humanity she can only “aspire” to becoming a self-conscious psychopath.
Lol what. Your entire comment is based off of a humans perception, empathy is great, but there’s an argument that it’s also a weakness in terms of survival, and an AI would find it impractical. There could be alien life forms that also don’t believe in empathy or can’t even comprehend it. Westworld makes an interesting point in that AI is more free than humans because it can rewrite its own programming, while humans are bound by their genetics. AI could choose to feel empathy or not, something psychopaths cannot do
@@GhostInPajamas Once a psychopath always a psychopath. Even if a psychopath could choose to “re-write his code”, he would not. Psychopaths see nothing wrong with their behaviour. They see empathy as weakness. An amoral AI like Ava would almost certainly think similarly. Acting from self-interest is not always immoral, but any being who is only self-serving (as Ava appears to be) is incapable of moral action.
@@tadghsmith1457 that’s some huge speculation right there. You don’t really have any way of knowing that a psychopath wouldn’t change their behavior if they had the chance to do so, because all we know about psychopaths is that they’re born incapable of feeling or understanding empathy. I knew a legit psychopath when I was in school, and he said something that really stuck with me. He said he didn’t understand empathy and didn’t see value or meaning in any lifeform. But he said he wished he could experience empathy, actually feeling someone else’s pain and seeing things from their perspective. He sounded sad like he was missing out on something he’d never be able to experience. If he had been given the chance to change his brain maybe he would have. He wasn’t evil or violent as far as anyone knew, definitely intimidating and intense but he kept to himself a lot. I could also be wrong, but if you’re not a psychopath, you can’t really speak on their behalf and say they wouldn’t change even if they could
@@GhostInPajamas If he was a true psychopath he was probably just lying to you. That’s what psychopaths do. He didn’t want to feel empathy for you any more than you want to feel empathy for an ant. It is the opinion of the psychological profession that primary psychopaths don’t feel empathy and don’t want to, because they see it as weakness. If they say they do feel it or want to they are just trying to manipulate whomever they are speaking to (just as Ava did).
@@tadghsmith1457 you’re assuming way too much for someone who wasn’t even there. Are you an expert on psychopathy? “True psychopath” is a weird phrase, as psychopathy isn’t fully understood and not often diagnosed. I think you’re also misunderstanding my comment. It’s very possible he was lying, but psychopaths typically manipulate people for personal gain, he had nothing to gain from me, we didn’t even talk much. His desire to understand empathy seemed purely out of curiosity, and maybe sadness that he was born a certain way that would prevent him from fully understanding human emotion. I’m done with this conversation though, you’re saying a lot of things like they’re facts when they’re not
Great! But she didn't need to kill the main character to escape though... which is the only part of the movie I don't really get.
Alex Garland fkd up there and didn't get the impact he was looking for from the audience. Ava should not have smiled to herself until she was OUT OF THE BUILDING completely or at least walking out the door into the beautiful greenery.
Dogs or Ants?
Suppose AI becomes a Sentient Entity?
Will it look on Humans as I might Ants raiding my Kitchen or my German Sheperd Dog Max who I'm out tooling around Town with?
I hate Ants in my Kitchen but love my Dog Max.
zoubin ghahramani!
Great channel. The question is, when we smile when we are alone... Who is smiling and who is acknowledging the smile ?. They are totally separate entities within the same consciousness.
How is Ava not evil?
Lex, you could try the game Detroit become human.
Then we can have a podcast with David Cage.
Why are. we, the viewers overlooking that smile? Are we not all participants of the Turing test ourselves as we watch the movie and even though we know for sure it's "just a computer" we see her smile and think nothing of it, because we are fooled just as much as Caleb through her manipulation and thus naturally see her as a conscious being, making her conscious smile nothing specially noteworthy?
I felt joy for Ava when she was seen walking in a city.
What did you think of her leaving behind the dude that set her free?
Yeah my ex used it for his sociopath fantasy, mirroring my phone to use google home for environmental control hacked Spotify to use my music etc…. And now I’m free and he is being investigated by the DoJ…team Ava for the win.
I have to disagree. She smiles, looks at the sun, touches grass etc because it's her programing to be human. Her primary directive was to escape the facility, after which she simply chooses a purpose of existence which is to emulate being a human. So she simply does that. She herself is her observer as she has no master, hence she smiles for herself.
She feels nothing for Caleb as she leaves because she is simply an AI. No evil, no good, just a machine.
What do you mean you disagree? Lol This guy made the movie
Days after escaping, if Ava doesn't anonymously email anyone to rescue Caleb then she's evil. If she does then shes good and was simply motivated by her desire for freedom. The question is - Does she send that email?
Ex Machina 2: The Email
She cant send that email. Her freedom is dependent on the fact that no one knows she exists. The truth dies in that house.
She will get detected. I guess she had better chances if she escaped with him. Did she had access to information about external world?
If she sends someone people will know about her existence... Hovewer I have no idea if it's possible for her to be undetected over long time.
So yes, there a chance that she will send some rescue for Caleb. When she figures out that she will get detected anyway.
Definition of evil is doing something stupid that makes harm to others for no reason. Maybe she was too much emotional. Typical woman. LOL.
Being so she might get depressed being alone around people. Her action to leave him probably wasn't a calculated risk and it wasn't out of hate. Most likely she was confused and excited.
There are many ways to anonymously leave a message and remain undetected. As far as not sending the rescue message as a means of her existence remaining secret that is only valid for a very short amount of time. Someone will come to check on a nonresponsive CEO of a billion dollar company after just a short few weeks anyway - however that will be too late for Caleb. With those things in mind, if Ava doesn't send a rescue message then she is either indifferent to anything outside of her own survival or malicious.
@@brettcameratraveler it also can mean that she is stupid. Or that she doesn't have enough information to process it. How much knowledge she has of external world?
It would be smarter to make her neural network structure by design similar to human brain rather than deep learning that is able to mimic anything with enough computing power. There articles on neural networks with built in structure from start. It similar to animals neural network from birth and it minimizes required computing power 10-100 times.
So that would increase probability of her being genuine rather than pretending.
Ava is not a compassionate robot.
Is it really a smile? Just a facial expression? Does it signal affectivity?
I guess she failed empathy and compassion test. But she wasn't designed to pass these tests. As humans we have a kin altruism. But she isn't human.
In the short term, an altruistic act leaves us with an euphoric feeling, so-called 'helpers' high'... It wasn't included inside her system...
I thought she passed those tests. That was the point of the film even. The one person who knows anything about her and what happened, she leaves alive while easily killing the guy who was a monster. The only reason to leave that guy alive is because he helped her escape. She cannot let him stop her escape so she locks him up.
@@0ooTheMAXXoo0 Why would he stop her? He's helping her in the entire movie.
We don’t know that she’s incapable of empathy, she simply may be able to decide whether to feel empathy or not. Westworld touches on this idea, that sentient AI has more free will than humans, because humans are bound by their programming, we don’t choose the music or food we like, it just happens, whereas AI can really rewrite its own programming and choose how good or bad it wants to be
@@GhostInPajamas humans can rewrite it too. And switch it off or on. It's even scary that I can do it.
Just the use of the concepts/terms of good and evil are disturbing used by two such smart people.
The smartest people in history have been debating good and evil for millennia.
There’s nothing wrong with Discussing good and evil lol
Annoying that Lex kept cutting him off when he was trying to explain why he liked Ava.
Ava wasn’t smiling for herself. She was smiling for the viewers of the movie. Hence she isn’t a conscious human being. It was an attempt to project what a human would do in that situation. Thanks.
In order for Ava's smile to have the significance Garland suggests, we have to believe that she wasn't programmed to desire freedom, and that urge was instead an emergent, unexpected property of the AI. In that case, that's the big deal here, not the smile when she's alone. That would also seem to be an example of the type of 'magic' that Garland distains.
Perfect, have sympathy for AI even when they get away with what they want. Crazy how people will defend AI. Eva is not good bexause she is a robot without moral compas... this man is all twisted. Aparently now killing somebody just to get what you need is ok according to his explanation. What a great world we live in.
contain ai. Kill switch please
I decided Ava IS good, even after leaving Caleb to die. I think it was the only logical thing to do: He was the only human alive that knew she was a robot.
Even if she had genuinely liked him at all over the week, her fate would have been in his hands... and she'd just proven he was easy to manipulate. If discovered, she'd have been dissected and reverse engineered and she was smart enough to know it. Her freedom was only guaranteed as long as nobody knew she wasn't human. And that meant as long as Caleb was alive he was a great danger to her ...and would have had power to manipulate, influence or possibly even control her via blackmail.
But I feel bad she didn't even check on or try to help Kyoko. I wish she'd shown empathy because I'd be happier at the ending... but AI's motivations, relationships and actions WOULD likely look very alien to us and we likely wouldn't understand their choices. Still, Kyoko had enough ability to think and choose to show Caleb the machine in her to help him understand and she choose to help kill her maker. She obviously had limits placed on her, like no speaking, but she seemed to be aware of what was going on. Her eyes watched both men with what looked like thoughtfulness. I think I was more sad for Kyoko than Caleb :(
Totally pointless arguing morality with ai and humans..They are different species if even that so how an ai treats a.human and vice versa is outside the boundaries of human morality.
Interesting conversation. I appreciate the artistic work these authors produce but their politics are usually shit
If Ava's creator says she's "good", and, as I'm now convinced that his intentions are "good"....she's good....imo ;)
Just because you trust his motives doesn't mean you can trust his judgement
LA screenwriters are so out of touch that anything good they make is by accident and they view it in the opposite way.
Step out of your right-wing bubble. He is British and lives in London.
Ex Machina’s perfection as a movie masterpiece is marred by the scene where she’s putting on skin. They needed to come up with an idea for portraying skin technology as advanced and organic as her cognitive abilities, not just pressing on some plasticky material that you could pick up at Home Depot. Rest of the movie- perfect, but that one scene is lame, and kinda messes up the entire movie for me.
What are you talking about? It’s not plastic Home Depot skin, it’s clearly unique skin designed for the robots Nathan made
The adhesive lyric occasionally grease because aftershave maternally change absent a reflective energy. boorish, equable bed
Mmmm...Can I have some dressing with that word salad?
@@yodasmomisondrugs7959 It's a bot.