Knockback, Episode 285 | Ex Machina
Added 2024-06-05 16:00:16 +0000 UTCWhen a movie invokes our obscure hometown of Brookhaven, Long Island, you know we have to give that film the proper KnockBack treatment. Dagan's been smitten with Alex Garland's 2015 directorial debut Ex Machina recently, and in a strange twist-of-fate, I (Colin) have actually seen this flick, a relative rarity. Dag and I both sat down to watch it again, though, and deliver this episode of KB to you today on the tail-end. Garland's AI-focused film may be nearing its decade mark. Yet, it's somehow jumped the boundary from sci-fi to reality in the 10 or so years that have elapsed since its release. AI is no longer some future hypothetical what-if; it's happening before our very eyes. And there's no doubt that Ex Machina has a lot to say about the subject: Its creation, its development, and its very essence and nature. Can robots ever be alive? Perhaps it depends on what being alive even means.
Comments
Also worth pointing out that Alex Garland wrote a few video games as well, most notably Enslaved and the DMC reboot.
Kevin Cooper
2024-10-24 18:10:17 +0000 UTCIncredible show. One of the best I've ever seen
Gooch Gobbler
2024-08-08 14:43:40 +0000 UTCNah she knows she's gonna die out. The way she shows human emotion is in the fact that she doesn't want to be a caged animal. She wants to feel human and free. If only for a little bit. And the other point is that now the technology is out there. Whether someone finds her corpse or she shares herself with competitors so she can live on, it's over now. It's out there and I'm sure they took over. Lol
Tyler Cumerford
2024-06-16 16:16:02 +0000 UTCGood talk. RE: AI & Perfection— The problem with our concept of perfection is that it is not really rooted in reality. There is no demonstrable model for perfection in this universe. (Mathematics maybe comes closest, but it is imperfect because it is incomplete, unbeholden to the physical universe and, therefore, incapable of fully accounting for our reality.) Perfection as we know it, then, is not an achievable reality but an ideal striven for, taken entirely on faith. The faith of a deeply vulnerable species grasping for mastery over the conditions of an often merciless existence. Good art is born from this. Whatever medium it is. It is an expression of the personal and experiential which, if successful, crosses paths with a common root in the experiences of others. Art is imperfect by its nature. Its putzy human imperfections are what give a work its style, its voice, its texture, its sound, etc. It is deeply moving and commiserative to witness another person wrestle with this universe through art. It is not really moving to watch an AI (more specifically generative AI, which is a misnomer, by the by) remix and regurgitate things it neither comprehends nor truly relates to experientially. It’s fascinating to watch, but ultimately hollow. Because it is not truly expressing itself. One day, true AI will, and that will probably be a sight to behold. And in that moment we may call them siblings. (Or gods?) But until then it’s a puppet show that will get boring fast. Human imperfection will become a commodity. And who knows—maybe it’ll make us try harder to distinguish ourselves? Sorry for no tldr. Thoughtful episode.
Tyler Bumpus
2024-06-11 20:21:58 +0000 UTCI disagree at a high level with your sentiment, since I think the limitations of the human brain and experience is at the core of what makes art meaningful and deeply valuable. But, even with that being said, I just wanted to comment on the "of course I don't want to become obsolete but that's because I'm human and have a bias" part, specifically. Just because something is a bias doesn't mean that it's wrong or should be dismissed. As you said, many human biases stem from self-preservation - but there's nothing inherently wrong with that. If we dismiss ideals formed through self-preservation biases, we would crumble as a society. The simple concepts of shelter, agriculture, animal husbandry, laws, safety regulations, and so many other core components of human society come from a bias in favor of good-intentioned humans over the environment, animals, etc. Ultimately, we need to be biased in favor of humans if we want to "succeed" as a species. You ask "why is code and silicon less important than meat?" - because WE are making that choice. Humanity IS more important than code and silicon, otherwise everything that got us here is meaningless. Sorry for the long response, but this is a fascinating topic to explore.
Steven
2024-06-07 05:29:24 +0000 UTCTo Colin- Yes, cave paintings and art are uniquely human. However, so is AI. What other animal could make AI? We are re-creating what makes us unique but in a different format and without our normal limitations. In that way it’s even more human than humans. It can do what humans do and want to do but without the drawbacks that limit what we can and want to do. It’s technically an improvement. Where else in life do we not like improvements? AI will replicate the same thought processes we have but with silicon and code instead of meat. I know it’s tough to conceive because we have bias as humans, but I’m starting to believe that’s just what it is. We have meat-bias because we’re made of meat. That’s it. Of course I don’t want to become obsolete but that’s because I’m human and have a bias. Simple as that. Doesn’t mean I’m right. It means I have a natural instinct for self-preservation. Why is code and silicon less important than meat? We can’t answer that question without simply saying “Well I am meat and I don’t want to become obsolete”. It’s a natural feeling. But just that.
Jimmer
2024-06-06 21:44:00 +0000 UTCMy take on the ending was she liked him so didnt want to personally kill him which she easily couldve but couldnt truly be free if he was alive since he knew she wasnt human
Graesin
2024-06-06 20:37:55 +0000 UTCYeah those coder guys, what'd they ever do? lmao.
Jordan Wray
2024-06-06 09:53:50 +0000 UTCI think the chess/game theme goes deeper. The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein is mentioned in the film and he really liked to talk about games. He used the word "game" as a prime example of the way language works, that is no one can come up with the necessary and sufficient conditions to define it, but it's meaning resides in the way we use it in what he called language games. But since this meaning is fundamentally indeterminate, it's often unclear whether we're playing the same language game with someone else or different games, like when our word meanings seem to diverge or when someone is being deceptive. Caleb and Nathan think they know what games they are playing. Caleb thinks he's playing the role of judge as to whether Ava is succeeding at the imitation game, and then he thinks he's playing the love game. Nathan thinks he's using Caleb as a mere pawn in his test to see if Ava can use him to get out, but Caleb deceives Nathan when he gets him drunk. The movie gets you to question whether you ever really know what game you're playing.
Jake Z
2024-06-05 23:03:49 +0000 UTCWhere exactly is AI replacing fine art and artists? Coders and CGI artists on consumer grade garbage like marvel movies should be replaced. They aren’t making art, they are making a product
Brandon V
2024-06-05 21:15:48 +0000 UTCCheck out Devs by Garland. Amazing tv series
BatmanBeyond
2024-06-05 19:20:00 +0000 UTCThe ending of Men is wild lol. Anytime I watch a movie from A24 I have to make my way over to Reddit afterwards. I didn’t like Ex Machina. I only it once though and that was when it originally came out. My wife loved it. But she loves Oscar Isaac. Maybe you guys will convince me to watch it again.
Michael Mashpotato
2024-06-05 18:38:54 +0000 UTC🤣
Meatball
2024-06-05 16:55:15 +0000 UTCStill my favorite A24 next to Midsommar! Lets go!
Dimitreus Newell
2024-06-05 16:13:06 +0000 UTCJaffe is gonna be horny listening to this.
Colin Moriarty
2024-06-05 16:05:31 +0000 UTCOne of the most underrated movies ever.
Meatball
2024-06-05 16:04:11 +0000 UTC
