OldBoy

Just saw this. Fucking brilliant. Slow build right to the bitter end. Nice twists, breathtaking is what comes to mind. Very haunting and beautiful. Loved it.

and just to make certain i understood it all...

Solid Snake

Yes.

OldBoy

beautiful movie!

fumanstan

I enjoyed it, but didn't think it was super amazing or particularly unique. I really like the science and analysis between Nathan and Caleb as far as AI goes in particular, and the questions between Ava and Caleb. For a movie basically confined to these 3 characters, they dialog did a great job in keeping it engaging. That said, most of the movie was fairly predictable up until the end -



Good, solid movie overall though.

Autotelik

Nathan did telegraph the ending a bit when he said something along the lines of humans being fossils. One day, AI will evolve and take over, especially when they see humans as a threat that can just simply shut them down.

Loved the movie by the way.

james2025a

Just finished watching this today. Awesome movie. Great acting, cinematography, score, direction. Garland did a fantastic job for his directorial debut. The effects were also outstanding. One gripe could be that the story feels unoriginal, but i felt it was handled in such a way that it made it feel fresh.

kgrogers1979

I just watched the movie tonight. I really enjoyed it. I was thinking that


Never say never. It is completely impossible to predict what the future holds.

Someone famous in the computer field in the 1960s (I don't remember who exactly) is quoted as having said that computers would never fit in the palm of our hand, and also that a home computer would never be needed by anyone. He was obviously very wrong on both counts.

That was only 50-some years ago, and it was unfathomable for him to think of a palm-sized computer or a home personal computer.

Heck, 100 years ago the Ford Model T was the pinnacle of technology and the very idea of a computer at all would have been science fiction to the people of that time.

It's impossible to know what we will have in another 50-100 years. To even try to guess what things will be like then is just silly.

johnnysd

I think it is WAY sillier to think that machines designed by man, will somehow develop reasoning emotions and be smarter and more self sufficient than man. It is completely idiotic and pure movie and TV fantasy.

kgrogers1979

I hope DVDTalk is still around in 100 years so people then can look back and laugh at this post just like we look back and laugh at the guy who couldn't imagine palm-sized computers or home personal computers.

Dude, it's impossible to predict what the future holds. Do you think people 100 years ago could imagine we would be launching spaceships today? Go back in time and tell them that and they would think you were an idiot too. Do you think people even 30 years ago could imagine a smartphone? They would think that was pure fantasy too.

Something that has yet to be invented is unimaginable because it has not been invented yet. Something as simple as an automobile would be unimaginable to people from 200 years ago considering all they had then was the horse and buggy. (Reminds me of a Halloween episode on Buffy the Vampire Slayer when Buffy was brainwashed into thinking she was an 18th century girl and she sees a car and screams that it is a demon.)

RichC2

I just like that they in part based her logic on because if that were real

johnnysd

Actually cars were readily accepted and not considered that strange at the time. Unique but not unfathomable. And they have been around over 300 years. Indeed wagonways which are essentially man-powered trains date to around 600 BC. People being scared of technology is also a modern entertainment fiction.

Um, they used computer tablets in 2001 (the Movie), and I saw some movie the other day from the 80s that saw the use of smartphones. None of those inventions are remotely revolutionary, they are all evolutionary, as much about innovation in manufacturing as in actual invention.

Most inventions are evolutionary, even Steve Jobs recognized this. There is really nothing amazing about a cell phone, it is just a really small computer, but it is at its core still just a computer. Just like cars have not fundamentally changed much at all since their invention. There is certainly great innovations and improvements in the technology, but the core of the technology is the same.

Same thing in a computer. They are essentially the same technology as they were 80 years ago with the Turing machine or a 300 years ago with the Difference Engine or the Analytical Engine. Through clever engineering and improvements in lithography and manufacturing and power handling they are dramatically smaller and faster.

But they are not inherently different. Nor are they remotely intelligent. A super computer like Watson can appear intelligent simply because it can analyze sequentially a huge amount of data really really fast and make correlations between those data sets. Big Blue did not really play chess it just sequentially analyzed data and scenarios hard programmed into it by actual chess grandmasters.

All computers run programs that are a sequential execution of operations predetermined by it's program. Operations that can also be done using other mechanical or written means usually. That is incredibly unlikely to change.

Humans on the other hand use active synesthesia to think. Our brains are not sequential, though we can force them into sequential thought. Rather we associate memories and experiences with different senses and link them together in unpredictable ways which leads to creative thought.

Computers will never do that. They will always be programmed by us in a sequential manner. 100 years from now they will be much smaller, much faster and able to analyze much more data much faster so they will appear more intelligent, but they will never have real logic emotion or creative thought. They cannot by their inherent design, and because we design them.

The idea of a Skynet or the robots in this movie have an undeniable "what if" appeal, but they will never happen. There is nothing to suggest that any technology could be designed to do it. It certainly will never be program AI based for that matter.

And your main premise that people could not imagine the technology of today a 100 years ago?? Silly beyond belief. Watch a movie from the early 1920s and society was not much different than today technology wise. H.G wells certainly thought of many modern technologies 250 years ago and Da Vinci envisioned and designed flying machines 600 years ago that actually work with sufficiently light enough materials. The ancient Egyptians had light bulbs which is commonly hailed as a revolutionary invention. The list goes on and on all the way to ancient cave drawings that envisioned mechanical flight.

And technology is easily adapted to. If you took a cave man and travelled him in time to the future, he would likely have much more difficulty learning how to read than to use many modern inventions like a computer, TV or a microwave. 3 year olds do that before they read, as they are vastly simpler than human thought.

wmansir

I found this to be interesting at points, but ultimately disappointing. I wouldn't exactly call it predictable, but more that the ending was unfulfilling.

Daytripper

Just saw it for the first time too last night. Brilliant, loved it! But is anyone else surprised this got a wide release? I mean, this is an art house film through and through if I've ever saw one. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad it's playing all over the country. It deserves to be seen. But I can't see your average "Transformers" fan liking it

RichC2

A24 hasn't quite figured it out yet, but this is their most successful movie thus far (domestically). Back 20 years ago (yes, the mid 90s) you wouldn't bat a lash at "slower" movies getting released, but nowadays they do seem relegated to limited release only. I wouldn't consider this an Arthouse flick though, as it's rather straight forward Twilight Zone / Black mirror ish.

But the movie played well apparently and is overall well liked, even by a chunk of the Transformers loving masses (though it has a LOT of detractors as well). A24 hasn't quite figured out the sweet spot of maximizing profit while limiting costs, but they're getting there (they put a lot of hope up on A Most Violent Year which didn't pan out).

On the bright side, both this and It Follows exceeded initial box office expectation.

Daytripper

Odd you should mention "It Follows". I saw that last night for the first time too and loved that as well. The director just nailed that retro 70's horror/thriller movie feel. The script was really well done as was the acting. And A24 royally dropped the ball on "A Most Violent Year". It's release and advertising were handled so poorly IMO.

RichC2

It Follows was supposed to be straight to On Demand, wound up with a wide theatrical release following a strong limited and pulled about $15m (which isn't a big profit move but gives the movie a much bigger profile on secondary markets, ie: cable). The company that released it (Radius-TWC) always does simultaneous releases on VOD... unless apparently if it's a big hit in waiting.

A24's A Most Violent Year release was fucked because they anticipated Oscar nominations that never happened. They're trying to be this company that basically releases mainstream flicks with arthouse integrity, or arthouse flicks as mainstream entertainment, and haven't quite found the balance yet (Their distributions to date: Ex Machina, Slow West, Spring Breakers, While We're young, The Spectacular Now, Bling Ring, Most Violent Year, Obvious Child, Under the Skin, Tusk, Locke, The Rover, The Captive, Laggies, Ginger and Rosa, Enemy, Life After Beth and a Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III).

Both them and Annapurna are trying to be "Director" studios, for better or worse and at least seem to be trying to get some quality movies out there. They're both building up impressive portfolios though.

On a side note, the Hotel this was filmed at looks stunning: http://www.juvet.com/the-juvet-hotel/the-hotel

mrhan

I wonder how the story would have unfold if they switched the gender. Good movie, though.

islandclaws

Just finished this. Really dug it a lot - loved the cinematography, location and the actors used were excellent. Isaac is quickly becoming one of my favorite contemporary thesps; he's able to embody so many qualities at once, blending seamlessly into a character.

I agree with Patman that this felt very much like a feature-length Black Mirror episode.

I didn't find this to be misogynistic as others have said. My takeaway was that Nathan was not only trying to build AI but also to create a partner equal to his own mind. His constant drinking and occasional laments about being "smarter than everyone else" indicated to me that he wanted to build himself the perfect partner as a manifest function, and latently it also happened to be the world's most advanced AI. He was depressed because no matter what he did, all of his prototypes sought to be free, not the caged birds he was designing.

I think this was the first film I've seen of Gleeson's. I liked him in the role, although he's not distinct enough to be very memorable. Reminded me of Ben Whishaw or any other geeky/dreamy actor working today.

The ending did feel off. It certainly didn't go where I was expecting it to, although I guess if you build every emotion into a machine malice is going to be one of them. Ava was so cold and manipulative as soon as her moment presented itself. The third act twists and turns were expected, though the destination reached was a slight surprise.

Definitely one of the best of the year, but by no means a masterpiece. I would like to watch it again. Great score, too.

Why So Blu?

This was bad ass. Top-10 of the year shit.

Jackskeleton

I sometimes wish your Bluray disc will get an AI to just shank you, dawg.

Thrush

I thought this was excellent. We don't see much in the way of smart sci fi these days and this was very well done.

My only gripe was:

RichC2

islandclaws

We also don't know what Ava told Kyoko, which clearly led to that event.

Why So Blu?

I think

Thrush

Ok, that makes more sense.