Sociology: Ex Machina - Mythology, Analysis, and Review Project

This document provides a detailed analysis of the film Ex Machina, addressing questions related to its themes and characters from a sociological perspective. The analysis begins by identifying the creator of the film, Alex Garland, and his awards. It then explores the dynamics between the characters, particularly Nathan and his creation, and how they relate to the Pygmalion myth. The Turing test and its significance in the film are discussed, along with the ethical implications of artificial intelligence and the fear it creates. The interactions between Ava and Caleb are examined, focusing on how gender and desire influence their relationship. The roles of Kyoko and Nathan are also analyzed, including their power dynamics and motivations. The film's exploration of love, relationships, and the changing balance of power are also explored, with references to Foucault's theory. The analysis also discusses Ava's final actions, her motivations, and the film's commentary on artificial intelligence and the consequences of playing God. The document incorporates references to various scholarly sources and reviews to support its arguments.

Running Head: SOCIOLOGY 0
MYTHOLOGY

SOCIOLOGY 1
Q1) The creator of Ex Machina is Alex Garland, an English novelist, director, screenwriter
and film producer. He is born on May 26, 1970, in London, UK. He has won several awards
and rewards such as Silver Scream Award, Gerardmer Film Festival Jury Prize awards and
Toronto Film Critics Association Awards. The latest movie he directed was Annihilation
released in 2018.
Q2) There seems to be two distinct dynamics between Nathan and his creation. Nathan is far
from being a stereotypical ‘mad scientist’ such as Victor Frankenstein, his construction is far
more well-designed than the monster Frankenstein and the dynamic between him and the
robots looks like too much multifaceted than the revenge plots that Victor and his monster
have for each other. In addition, considering closer inspection, it was found that both
Frankenstein and Ex Machina model the exact same character dynamic at their core. One that
tells the tale of a mad expert passionate with building life however, unprepared for the
outcomes that follow. “Deus ex machina is a Latin term, meaning ‘god from the machine’ –
which provides a clue to its meaning.” The pride and self-admiration of a self-regarding
originator who plays god, the interest of the observer determining and being affected by the
discovery, and the yet to be fully established new formation of “conscience” itself.
Q3) Nathan very unlike Pygmalion as he destroys that model, fetch the information and tries
again. He also implies to Caleb that he is about to do the same thing to Ava however, Nathan
does not realize that introducing Caleb into the equation will lead to permanent downfall.
Q4) The Turing test in the film is just a smoke screen. The actual test that Nathan is running,
is to see which of his archetypes can lead to outwit him and escape. Ex Machina also touches
upon the more useful offshoots of the Turing test which embraces on having machines
validate true creative ability. It's not much of a spoiler to say that, on numerous events, Ava
proves that she can be just as creative as any human and this further create new plot in the
movie.
Q5) Ex- Machina seems to create a fear of modern technology in the movie and that is based
on Artificial Intelligence. “Ex Machina’ explicitly takes its stance of opposition towards the
procedure of developing a sentient mind. It shows a warning against the last invention man
could ever create.

SOCIOLOGY 2
Q6) Ava and Caleb's interactions almost instantly become encouraged by his perception of
her as a woman, and therefore as an object of desire. However, the framing device is "is this
woman really a human being, are her feelings actually appreciated, does her life truly
matter?" If the answer is "no," then Caleb accepts it’s acceptable to leave her in a cage and let
her be oppressed and battered by Nathan. Our desire is embedded with more humanitarian
elements and thus may not leave her into the Cage.
Q7) Kyoko is first shown as Nathan’s silent, exotic servant who is constantly abused. The
decision to pick Caleb was made by Nathan, it's likely that Kyoko was in the chamber when
isolated Nathan was drunkenly discharging why his choice was so mastermind, to prefer a
programmer in love with supercomputers to fall in love with a walking chatting computer
(Reid, p 863).
Kyoko used to be able to talk, a suite that was taken from her by Nathan, making her, even
more, a slave to Nathan than Ava is even as she's a cognisant being that cannot interact.
Kyoko is the real Turing Test in the film. The concept that Kyoko can be perceived as a
human, and the representation of female characters in Ex Machina, is discovered in depth in
Angela Watercutter’s artefact “Ex Machina Has a Severe Fembot Issue.”
Q8) Nathan is a lonely god who makes life to please him. He can only succeed if Ava (Eve)
is a whole person with free determination. It is not enough to be a mere automaton. However,
being a person, she is free to disapprove his authority and escape from him (Mill).
Q9) love and relationships are part of being human and therefore necessary to a test of
dividing from machine (Epley et al. pp 143-155). It was also said that gender does not define
relationships or whether you can feel their warm skin against yours. Hence, the world full of
technology advances rapidly, there are various questions as to what organises actual
relationships.
Q10) Throughout the story in Ex Machina, the balance of power changes within the trio,
shown the struggles within each dyad. Some transitions are instantly projected and others are
entirely unexpected. Considering the variability of Foucault's Theory of Power, the changes
in the relationships throughout “Ex Machina” are intended to happen (Mayes, pp 189-210).
Q11) She visually indistinguishable from a real human, on the crowded street of a city: a
killer A.I. loose and incognito in the human world. It also sees Ava wearing clothes and
synthetic skin to obscure the electronics that had been uncovered all through the movie. The

SOCIOLOGY 3
time was really fast and no human machine whose machinery is not visible (Kruger, Terje K.
Lien and Alexander Verl pp 628-646).
Q12) Ava was designed with the purpose that Caleb would be vulnerable to her. In the eye of
Ava, Caleb was just a means to an end. She never met anyone else before. Caleb was morally
conscious individual that why he was selected. In addition, the only option was for her to
manipulate Caleb one more time and then lock him in the room.
Q13) Ava put herself in the role of the romantic victim and it was fully believed that it will be
the only way she can escape. She is born being able to communicate, she is conscious of
customs like romance and is capable of making works of art, but while in her cage, with the
less-than-human Nathan as her creator and overseer, she is still a machine.
Q14) Ava's sole purpose is to escape from the place. Hence, she used Caleb with her skills
programmed into her like sexuality and manipulation to escape the facility. The aim for
locking up Caleb and leaving him there to death as Caleb is the only person who's aware of
the fact that she's not human. The only person in between her and the survival is Caleb and
she removed the possibility by locking him up.
Q15) It is a digital-age Frankenstein that entertains as much as it pokes at bigger thoughts
beneath its surface. It’s a direct descendent of Frankenstein and scads of stories and the Island
of Doctor Moreau that have come before, bringing up classic problems of nature, nurture, and
what happens when we play God.
Q16) What an interesting idea about Pygmalion and Galatea being the first story of artificial
life and robots! A Bluebeard/Pygmalion blend with a twist – the film sounds very rich with
its hearkening to myths and legends, too. It does not move me up as due to differences in
perceptions.
Q17) Artificial intelligence is a topic that is on the Mount Rushmore of the best and most
intriguing fictional story ideas. The creation and storytelling of artificial intelligence seem as
limitless as modern technology itself that may create myth into reality (Ramos, Juan Carlos
Augusto and Daniel Shapiro, pp 15-18).

SOCIOLOGY 4
References
Epley, Nicholas, et al. "When we need a human: Motivational determinants of
anthropomorphism." Social cognition 26.2 (2008): 143-155.
Kruger, Jorg, Terje K. Lien, and Alexander Verl. "Cooperation of human and machines in
assembly lines." CIRP annals 58.2 (2009): 628-646.
Mayes, Patricia. "The discursive construction of identity and power in the critical classroom:
Implications for applied critical theories." Discourse & Society 21.2 (2010): 189-210.
Mill, John Stuart. "Utilitarianism." Seven masterpieces of philosophy. Routledge, 2016. 337-
383.
Ramos, Carlos, Juan Carlos Augusto, and Daniel Shapiro. "Ambient intelligence—the next
step for artificial intelligence." IEEE Intelligent Systems 23.2 (2008): 15-18.
Reid, Melanie. "Rethinking the Fourth Amendment in the Age of Supercomputers, Artificial
Intelligence, and Robots." W. Va. L. Rev. 119 (2016): 863.