Review of “Jurassic World”

Posted on by
2

JurassicWorldBack with a roar! The Jurassic Park franchise returns from the dead with a vengeance in the newest and highly anticipated installment since the original back in 1993, and certainly since The Lost World in 1997 and Jurassic Park 3 in 2001. Jurassic World will take you back to the island that started it all and deliver the same WOW factor as the original beloved favorite. Return to Isla Nublar to experience the park John Hammond envisioned but could never have dreamed would become a reality. “The park is open!” Enjoy the adventure, pseudo-science, character development, plot, the acting, and the music that you loved about Jurassic Park (1993) in a film that holds true to the very essence of what made the original such a great film but adds in the visual storytelling technology we enjoy today. For lovers of the ride at Universal Studios (FL/CA), you will enjoy experiencing the park in ways you may have only dreamed of, and for lovers of the franchise, despite the poorly produced past sequels (even though they are still fun to watch), prepare for your expectations to be greatly surpassed as you return to your childhood and experience Jurassic World.

Jurassic World takes us back to Isla Nublar off the coast of Costa Rica. Just south of the original park, a new theme park has been opened and is bustling with park guests and dinosaurs alike. The luxury theme park and resort is jointly ran by Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard) and of course the once chapter 11 InGen BioEngineering company founded by John Hammond (the late Richard Attenborough). For the last few years, the guest satisfaction ratings have plateaued at Jurassic World and Claire has worked with InGen’s Dr. Henry Wu (B.D. Wong) to develop a genetically modified hybrid to wow the guests and increase profits. But as Ian Malcolm once so eloquently put it “life will find a way,” the attempts to control the park’s “assets,” will not go as planned. After the newly minted genetically modified hybrid Indominous Rex cleverly escapes the paddock, it is up to Claire and her unconventional Navy veteran turned dinosaur control/safety expert Owen (Chris Pratt) to save Claire’s nephews Zach (Nick Robinson) and Gray (Ty Simpkins) as well as the over 20K park guests from the jaws of history’s top notch predators.

Where to begin? It seems so much easier to write a critique for movies that are just okay or even terrible. When working with such an incredible movie, it’s sometimes difficult to know where to begin and even harder to know when to stop. Going into the movie, I had my reservations-especially after seeing what I thought was a ridiculous scene from the trailer of Owen facing off and talking with the raptors–but I can honestly say that is this movie that I, as well as millions of others in their mid-to-late 20s and early 30s, have been waiting for since we saw the original as kids in theaters. It truly embodies everything that made the original great and capitalizes on it by adding in the digital effects and visual storytelling techniques we enjoy as part of modern cinema. The best movies are those that simultaneously embrace current technologies whilst remaining grounded in the very essence of what a movie should be: exceptional visual storytelling in terms of the art and science of filmmaking. This truly is the sequel we have been waiting for since the helicopter left Nublar 22 years ago.

I was watching Jurassic Park 3 with a friend in order to finish the first three movies prior to seeing Jurassic World last night, and I asked him and myself  “what was it about the first one that makes it such a great film and in the top 20 grossing movies of all time (and that’s even when adjusted for inflation)? We talked a little, and both decided that is was the dynamic plot, clever writing, memorable characters, and that wow factor of seeing dinosaurs like never before on the big screen that made the first movie not just a successful movie but a GREAT movie. That same dynamic plot filled with subplots and subtext, memorable characters, and more is captured by the current installment. Yes, this movie is high concept as summer blockbusters usually are; but just because it’s high concept doesn’t mean that we cannot experience character development, subtext, exceptional writing, and great visual storytelling. From the moment that I heard the all-too-familiar music and returned to Isla Nublar, I knew then that this was going to be one of the most exciting and phenomenal movie-going experiences of my life. And you know what? It was as exciting as seeing the original for the first time. Universal Pictures, Amblin Entertainment, and Legendary Pictures harnessed the power of what made the first movie great and brought a nearly extinct franchise back from the dead.

Just like the characters from Jurassic Park (1993) helped to make the movie what it was, so do the characters of Jurassic World. You have Claire who, much like Hammond, is a dreamer. Although, she is definitely more concerned with money than Hammond ever was. Witness as she goes from a cold shrew business woman to a courageous and loving aunt to her two nephews. Speaking of whom, witness the transition of Zach as the older mean brother who couldn’t be bothered with his sibling to risking his life to save his brother Gray’s. Dr. Henry Wu reprises his role as the genius behind the science that made Jurassic Park and now Jurassic World work. Every movie needs that hero who is unconventional and has subtle sexual tension with the strong female lead, and we get that, in spades, with Owen. There is the chief financier Simon Masrani (Irrfan Khan) who is concurrently overly concerned with making a profit but still genuinely concerned that his park guests are having fun. And finally, we have Lowery (Jake M. Johnson) who sports an original Jurassic Park t-shirt and has rubber dinosaurs on his desk because he loves the original park and is thrilled to work at the new one. Each of the characters has very unique personalities and traits that are meticulously woven into the plot in order to continually advance the story.

I also wanted to touch on the references to the previous films in the franchise. Early on, it was made known that the old Visitors Center would make a cameo appearance, but I did not expect the extent to which the old compound plays an intricate part in Jurassic World‘s diegesis (narrative). Claire is even dressed in all white like Hammond. Not only is the music powerful–almost to the point of tears–and harkens back to the first time you heard it, but the movie helps to make Jurassic Park feel like a real place because of Lowery’s t-shirt he bought off eBay and the banner of “when dinosaurs ruled the earth” now covered in dirt and mold that fell from the ceiling at the close of the first movie. Although not formerly acknowledged, there are many references to not only the first movie but also 2 and 3, and even the Jurassic Park Ride. From lines of dialog to easter egg camera shots and even to the Jurassic Park 1992 Jeep Wrangler, Jurassic World uses material from its storied past to support the current narrative and evoke fond memories. Interestingly, the movie also deals with the element of third party companies grossly sponsoring attractions and exhibits in theme parks. Just like even Disney’s Magic Kingdom is now sporting a Starbucks on Main Street, the same can be seen in many theme parks. Sometimes it seems like theme parks are sacrificing storytelling and creative theming for the almighty dollar. Perhaps this movie shows us what happens when greed overpowers creativity.

I feel that Universal Pictures (a Comcast Company) has been searching for its cash cow franchise like Disney’s Pirates, Avengers, and now Star Wars or like Warner Bros. Harry Potter (even though Universal rakes in the dough from the Wizarding World of Harry Potter at it’s Florida and soon California parks), like MGM’s James Bond, or 20th Century Fox’s Avatar or X-Men, but after the two failed sequels to Jurassic Park, all seemed lost. Until now. This installment in the 22 year-old franchise has been successfully resurrected and could quite possibly be a contender and a worthy opponent in the franchise competition. The way the final shots of the island were in the movie, I have a feeling that this was the official goodbye to this chapter in the Jurassic Park novel and the opening of the floodgates for followups to this movie that will hopefully continue the embrace of the essence of the original whilst continuing to advance the story of what happens when man creates and manipulates dinosaurs.

I don’t know what you have planned this weekend, but you NEED to get to the theatre to see this movie. I am even planning to see it again this weekend myself. But, I need to find an IMAX that is showing it in 2D (yes, that is correct 2D). Prepare to be taken back to your childhood and relive the experience all over again in the newest chapter of Jurassic Park.

As always, if you liked this review, please follow or subscribe or at least share the link on social media.

For my review of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom click here.

Ryan is a screenwriting professor at the University of Tampa. If you like this article, check out the others and FOLLOW this blog!

Follow him!

Twitter: RLTerry1

Instagram: RL_Terry

Thrillz (theme parks): Thrillz.co

Insidious 3 (movie review)

Posted on by
2

Insidious3Ridiculous: Chapter 3. The final chapter in the Insidious trilogy takes us all the way back to the beginning. Only, you will find that the beginning is far less terrifying and interesting than the previous films in this story. The one saving grace the film has is the pretty interesting backstory to Elise (Lin Shaye) and her small team of paranormal hunters. We also get a couple references to the Josh Lambert case from the previous movies, and we learn a little more about the bride dressed in black that brought Elise to the Lamberts in the first place. Compared to the the original and, to a lesser extent, the sequel, the third movie is much less developed diegetically (narratively) and contains poor dialog. I have a feeling most of the fans of the series will be disappointed by this installment. It is very apparent that James Wan did not have much to do with the final chapter in the series he created. For what it’s worth, the movie does have its moments of terror and cliche jump scares. As with many horror films, it’s still a fun one to watch with friends or on a date…most likely you’ll be able to put your arm around your movie date. So, there’s the silver lining.

Insidious Chapter 3 is the final movie in the Insidious trilogy. Follow Elise (Shaye) all the way back the beginning to a case involving a young lady named Quinn (Stafanie Scott) who recently lost her mother. Upon trying to contact her mother, Quinn feels she may have awaken something far more insidious (yeah, I went there, haha). Arriving without notice on the doorstep of Elise’s house, Quinn seeks her assistant in contacting her mother. Unlike the Elise from the previous movies, this one is scared to step back into the supernatural world and tells Quinn she cannot help her to the extent Quinn wants. Following continued terrifying events and malevolent appearances of evil entities, Quinn’s father (Dermont Mulroney) reluctantly contacts web-famous paranormal hunters (Leigh Whannell and Angus Sampson). Realizing that the entity that haunts Quinn is way beyond their expertise, all seems lost. But, Elise confidently arrives to save the day. Now, Elise must go into the further to conquer the evil that so desperately wants to claim the life of Quinn; but not only will she face the demon that wants Quinn, Elise must also confront her fears as well.

While my hopes for this film weren’t terribly high, I was definitely hoping for something better than what I saw. Although the sequel to Insidious was strong for a horror sequel, neither the second nor–definitely–the third are on par with the original. I know, I know, that is not uncommon in the horror genre, but there was such an opportunity to truly develop the events leading up to the Lambert case from parts 1 and 2. Now, we do get some character and subplot development in regards to the character of Elise, but that’s about it. The paranormal case of Quinn is not nearly as terrifying as the Lambert case and is not nearly as well executed. Often writing suffers in cliche horror films–such as this one–but the writing for most of the dialog was so incredibly poor that is was nearly laughable. Once the movie was over, it was as if everyone in the audience asked themselves “is that it?” And–spoiler alert–we get an almost comedic glimpse of the “Darth Maul” demon from the first movie.

Some of the few positive notes regarding the movie is the fact we do get to learn more about Elise’s character and her ragtag team of paranormal hunters. So, that was pretty cool and somewhat interesting. Although not directly explained, there is evidence to suggest why the bride dressed in black hates Elise so much, and kills her in the first movie. Unlike the first two movies, there is very little emotional investment or attachment to any of the characters with the exception of Elsie. Even in the first movie, her character is often considered the favorite in the films. That is most likely do to her good looks–for an older actress, confidence, compassion, and courage. And, in this movie, she has a great single line that prompts everyone to clap and cheer. You’ll just have to watch it to find out. Despite the terrifying nature of the movie, there are come minor comedic relief parts–ones that were intentional.

For me, the best part of watching this movie was the sneak peek into Jurassic World during the previews. So, if you are a fan of the Jurassic Park series, you may want to see Insidious 3 just for the exclusive look into next week’s box office smash hit! For fans of horror movies, you will probably enjoy this film even though it simply did not live up to the low bar of expectations.

If you enjoyed this review, please check out my others and SHARE, FOLLOW, or SUBSCRIBE to my blog for emil updates each week when I post.

“San Andreas” review

Posted on by
Reply

San_Andreas_posterA thrilling non-stop adventure! If you’re looking for a disaster movie that will have you on the edge of your seat the entire time, then check out Warner Bros., Village Roadshow, and New Line Cinema’s San Andreas starring Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. Despite having a one-dimensional plot and completely unbelievable scenarios, this movie will keep you entertained for the entire runtime. Spend your time with a ripped helicopter pilot who’s the poster child for a ‘Jack of all trades’ and his beautiful daughter who could out Eagle Scout an Eagle Scout. No dynamic love story here–just extremely high energy, larger than life, visceral complete and utter disaster around every corner. This movie definitely doesn’t do anything to help the realtors and architects in L.A. and San Fran. If you liked the original Earthquake, Volcano, The Day After Tomorrow, and The Core, then you will most likely enjoy this film. Or, if you were the kind of kid who would build cities out of Legos then have enormous fun destroying them, then this is definitely for you.

San Andreas is about a magnitude 9.7 earthquake affecting the famed San Andreas fault line in California. Form the Hoover Dam to China Town, the extremely destructive earthquake reeks havoc in its very wake. Follow Ray (Johnson) as he and his soon-to-be-ex wife Emma (Carla Gugino) unexpectedly team up to save their daughter Blake (Alexandra Deddario) from becoming the next victim to the record-breaking earthquake. Witness the utter destruction and peril that Ray and Emma have to overcome on their way from Los Angeles to San Francisco. Banning together to survive the earthquake, Blake and brothers Ben (Hugo Johnstone-Burt) and Ollie (Art Parkinson) must get to higher ground in order to be rescued by Ray and Emma.

Like with many over-the-top disaster movies, this one really doesn’t offer that much to critique. Of course the plot could be completely picked apart–very easily–but the thing about these movies is that they are produced for pure entertainment value. The writers and director are hoping that you don’t spend too much time thinking about the sheer impossibility or unlikelihood of Ray and Emma finding the aircrafts and watercraft they do. Or, why the city of L.A. would allow one helicopter pilot to use municipal gas and a helicopter to rescue his immediate family, meanwhile, basically abandoning all other citizens to peril. You see, it doesn’t take a film critic or scholar to notice the absurd plot devices and failed logic.

That being said, this film was very entertaining to watch and follows good visual storytelling structure. You have order (very briefly), followed by disorder (most of the movie), and the circle back to order once again. Oh yeah, there is a brilliant seismologist professor and media team at Cal-Tech (California Institute of Technology) who are basically there when the director needs something else to cut to. Otherwise, that whole sub-plot could have essentially been written out. Too bad, though. That subplot of the professor and his media team could have actually been fleshed out to be an intricate part of the plot.

That’s pretty well it. This is a movie that is unapologetic in that it is fully aware of what it is: a “Michael Bay”-ish disaster sci-fi movie. I am pretty sure that the cities of L.A. and San Fran should pretty well be completely leveled after the earthquakes. The movie is released during an appropriate time because it falls after Tomorrowland and before Jurassic World. It also typifies the summer movie season because it is a great popcorn movie that most anyone will enjoy.

If you liked this or other reviews of mine, please FOLLOW or SUBSCRIBE to this blog.

Tomorrowland (movie review)

Posted on by
Reply

TomorrowlandYou love visiting Tomorrowland at Magic Kingdom, now experience it in a whole new way in Disney’s Tomorrowland! If you have yet to see the movie, definitely watch it in IMAX. This refreshingly (mostly) original movie is a pleasant change of pace from the countless reboots and remakes out there. As a researcher into the convergence of cinema and theme parks (my thesis will be published soon), this movie is of particular interest to me because of how it translates the theme park land into a narrative film. Often we see the opposite: a theme park experience being inspired by or based on a movie. This movie is well paced, developed, and produced. Ordinarily, I receive much flack for how hard I can be on Disney. That’s because when you profess to be the best, you need to consistently deliver a quality product, and acknowledge the criticism both positive and negative. However, this is one Disney review that I am particularly excited to write because I truly enjoyed the movie immensely, and could see a glimpse of the classic Disney style that the brand and studio still bank on (but not necessarily still deliver) today.

Tomorrowland takes you from present day Cape Canaveral, Florida to a land that is bustling with dreams, ingenuity, and talent. Follow young Frank Walker (Thomas Robinson) as his trip to the 1964 New York City World’s Fair becomes much more than he could have ever anticipated. It’s there he meets a young lady named Athena (Raffey Cassidy) who shows him the futuristic city of Tomorrowland. Speeding up to present day, meet Casey Newton (Britt Robertson) who is doing everything in her power to thwart the demolition of the Kennedy Space Center NASA launch platform in order to save her dreams and her dad’s job. Through a series of unfortunate events, Casey comes into possession of a pin that shows her the world of Tomorrowland. Inspired by the glimpse of the city, Casey is determined to find out more about the mysterious pin. Only, Casey could never have dreamed about what this chance finding of the pin would mean; and furthermore, she could never have imagined the adventure she is about to find herself on to save the future of her world and Tomorrowland.

From the time the theme song “There’s a Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow” from Disney Carousel of Progress, located in present day Tomorrowland at Magic Kingdom, begins to play, you know right then and there that this movie will capture your imagination. For fans of and frequent visitors to either the park in Florida or the original in California, you will find many Easter Eggs (film jargon for references to other movies, books, theme park attractions, etc) from the Disney parks. Experience It’s a Small World right there in the movie theatre; and during the sweeping shots and panoramic views of Tomorrowland, see Space Mountain and a upgraded People Mover. Even some of the weapons are based on the ones used on the Buzz Lightyear attraction. If you have been on the People Mover ride, you will recognize that the design of Tomorrowland bears some resemblance to the model seen on the iconic attraction that is said to be the inspiration for EPCOT (Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow). Taking the existing attractions in the theme park land Tomorrowland and translating them into the diegesis of the movie Tomorrowland was done incredibly well and I feel Walt would be proud of this grand example of the convergence of two entertaining mediums.

Even though here are obviously similarities in the plot to other movies that carry along them theme “if humanity doesn’t change, it will mean the utter destruction of the world in acute and violent ways,” there is enough original content and development that it will not feel like another doomsday movie with the ticking-time-bomb plot device. The movie focusses on two characters and then their paths merge with one another. If you were to envision the movie as a road, think of it as two separate roads merging into one. I would even venture to say that there is a little of the 1980s classic The Neverending Story in this modern tale of dreams, destruction, change, and the future. Despite how easy it would have been for the writers to have greatly emphasized the socio-political context of much of the movie, the socio-political themes are mostly subtle and the film doesn’t feel like propaganda (much in the same way Avatar certainly did). When a movie essentially has two protagonists, it can become problematic for the writers and director, because fully executing thorough character development, grows increasingly difficult in the storytelling process (like trying to 100% focus on two things at the same time–it seldom happens). But, both the characters of young and adult Frank Walker (George Clooney) and Casey are handled very well respectively and both have unique character arcs.

Although the obvious CGI integration was sometimes a little too much, and I would have preferred practical set designs and special effects, both the “real” and the computer generated facets to the films production design were well-crafted and used effectively in the narrative. Sometimes in movies designed to be best-viewed in IMAX, the studios will play to the screen size, so to speak, even if it’s breaking away from the authenticity and very essence of the movie. No so, with Tomorrowland. The movie uses the IMAX technology as a storytelling tool, not merely a spectacle. Unlike many movies I have seen in the last couple of years, this one has well-defined central characters, with clearly established external goals, well-developed internal goals, and clearly defined opposition to those goals by way of the antagonist Nix (Hugh Laurie) and to a lesser extent, time itself. It has everything a wonderful movie needs to have in order to make the most of an exemplary narrative and excellent entertainment value.

If you are looking for a movie to watch this Memorial Day weekend, even though the remake of the horror classic Poltergeist may be tempting, definitely plan to see Disney’s Tomorrowland. You will be delightfully entertained for the entire runtime of the movie. It is highly unlikely that you will become bored in this film. Grab your friends, after your Memorial Day cookout, and head to the theatre.

As always, if you enjoyed this review, please SHARE on Facebook or Twitter and I encourage you to FOLLOW/SUBSCRIBE to this blog.

Also, a big thank you to all the men and women who serve in the US Armed Forces, as we specifically remember the ones who currently serve or have fallen on this special weekend.

“Ex Machina” Movie Review

Posted on by
1

Ex_MachinaA thought provoking science-fiction film. Universal Pictures and Film 4’s Ex Machina is a brilliant work of fantasy/science-fiction. From the time the movie begins to the time the credits roll, your mind will have a heightened sense of anticipation of what is about to happen next. This is one of those movies that will eventually find its way into film appreciation classes in order to dissect the many themes, both direct and indirect, implied and inferred, woven meticulously throughout the narrative. Over the years, there have been numerous other artificial intelligence (AI) movies, but this one is likely the best example and best produced movie in this sub-genre of science-fiction and fantasy. Maybe it’s because the dawn of AI is most likely upon us? Or, just because for once, a more serious and more realistic approach to tackling this fascinating subject is being showcased in theatres. From the writing, to the directing, to the cinematography, to the acting, Ex Machina is definitely a film to catch if you are a fan of science-fiction films that have real sociological themes and comment on the age-old quandary: man vs machine.

Ex Machina is about a young programmer/coder named Caleb (Domhall Gleeson) who works for the very “Google-like” company called BlueBook. Upon winning a contest to meet with the reclusive founder of BlueBook, Caleb is whisked away by helicopter to the beautiful mountain residence of founder Nathan (Oscar Isaac). Shortly after his arrival, Caleb learns that Isaac used the contest as a rouse in order to select a candidate for the Turing Test (an AI evaluation test, so to speak, to determine if an AI actually has human-like intelligence and reasoning). Caleb is astounded to come face-to-face with the world’s first true AI (Ava, played by Alicia Vikander) in the form of a beautiful woman who is precisely his type. After a few days of testing, it becomes clear to Caleb that there is something more than meets the eye; something darker underscores the bizarre testing in the remote mountain retreat.

Director Alex Garland, best known for 28 Days Later and Sunshine, demonstrates his writing-directing prowess in this beautiful, cutting edge movie. Although it is ordinarily fairly easy to become bored watching three principle and one supporting characters for nearly two hours, Garland uses his gift to orchestrate this film in such a way that each scene is fresh and clearly advances the plot. This film is one of the best examples of a well-developed plot that is constantly reinforced, checked, and advanced throughout the narrative. His handiwork is also seen in the character development, expressions on, and blocking of the actors. Like building a model, Garland provides solid plot structure upon which the more superficial elements are laid. Beyond the high concept plot, there are brilliant themes and provocative subtext that will aid in the overall performance of the film, and give film scholars, writers, and the scientific community something to toss around in spirited debates. Aside from the running theme of man vs machine, there are also themes of whether or not a machine is “born” hetero or homosexual, much in the same way that very debate is discussed in regards to humans. A quick note regarding the exquisite production design, it is simple yet absolutely perfect for the movie. I really enjoyed the straight lines and sharp angles, very Frank Lloyd Wright.

If you know anything about literature or screenwriting, you are most likely familiar with the term or plot device known as deus ex machina (latin for “god from the machine”). The textbook definition is something to the effect of a plot device whereby seemingly unsolvable dilemmas are suddenly and abruptly resolved by the unexpected intervention of a new character, event, or object; this often occurs when the writer has painted him/herself into a corner. Knowing this, analyzing the title is quite interesting. Essentially the title means “from the machine.” After watching the movie, I am unsure as to what is coming ‘from the machine,’ unless you count the emergence of human-like intelligence. Otherwise, it really isn’t explained–the significance of the title–beyond the fact the movie centers in and around the testing of an AI machine. It’s entirely possible that the title was selected simply because it sounds cool, fits easily on a marquee, and does point to the plot. Exploring the significance of titles and title sequences can often unlock hidden meanings in the film. On a side note, next time you watch Ridley Scott’s Alien, really pay attention to the opening title/credit sequence.

At the center of the movie is the Turing Test. Nathan tasks Caleb with the responsibility of objectively and subjectively analyzing and evaluating Ava to see whether or not she possesses human reasoning, problem solving, dialoging, and cognitive processing. His goal is to determine if Ava is essentially human. The following analysis does contain some information that may spoil the movie for some–fair warning–if you need to, please skip to the last paragraph. Following a sequence of events, Caleb devises a plan to escape with Ava after she professes feelings for him and he falls in love with her. Although at first in disbelief regarding her humanness, he believes she has the capacity to love and process cognitively equal to and perhaps superior to flesh-and-bone humans. Like any good antagonist, Nathan discovers the plan by way of a hidden camera; and instead of eliminating Caleb, explains that Ava is actually screwing with his mind–pretending to love him. He doesn’t believe Nathan, and continues with his plan that was already hatched, unbeknownst to Nathan. After a struggle, Ava is set free and winds up killing Nathan. Despite the professed feelings for Caleb, Ava leaves him locked away in a room with no means of escape. She boards the helicopter and heads off to the world of humans with no one to blow her cover or enslave her.

This is where the plot does leave room for question. Although the ambiguity of the reasoning behind Ava’s decisions involving murder and entrapment may have been intentional, the driving force behind the decisions to murder Nathan and leave Caleb trapped in the house, left to die should have been made clearer. But on the other hand, the ambiguity is perfect material for debating what may have been going through her “mind.” The reasoning for her murder of Nathan is fairly clear. He caused both mental and physical abuse, oppressed her, leaving her locked in a glass room like a lab rat. He stood in her way between slavery and freedom, and she needed him eliminated. Here’s where it gets tricky: why leave Caleb to die in the house when she professed her love? I think it’s because she was way more human than either Nathan or Caleb could have dreamt. She pretended to love Caleb. If pretending to have feelings for someone in order to use them to your benefit isn’t as human as it gets, I don’t know what is. Even though we never get a definitive answer in the diegesis of the movie, the audience is previed to that information.

Another interesting possible theme to discuss is Ava’s first encounter with another AI. There is a shot sequence between Ava and another female Asian AI immediately following her emergence from her glass cage. In the manner in which this encounter is shot, it could be read as lesbian undertones. No explicit romance is witnessed, but there are subtleties that Ava may be sexually attracted to the beautiful Asian female AI. Is it possible that something switched on inside her when she encountered another female for the first time? Perhaps innate repressed feelings were ignited, despite what Isaac said he programmed her to be? Maybe feelings that weren’t there for Caleb were made more intense by the other “female” in the house? This gets back to the argument if a human or machine is programmed from day one to be hetero or homosexual. These are questions best left up to those who want to speculate the inner-workings of Ava’s psychology and chemistry. But, nevertheless, are fun to talk about. Most likely, she was just plotting with the other AI, against Nathan and Caleb; but I feel there is a slight possibility of the former.

Ex Machina represents some of the best that the science-fiction/fantasy movies have to offer. It contains social commentary, science, and excellent subtext. While many science-fiction films suffer from adequate and well-crafted plot development, this one is a shining example of how beautifully produced a science-fiction/fantasy film can be. What makes this movie an excellent one to watch is the ability to intrigue the audience with both a scientific element and one that taps at your psyche and prompts you to think about the positive and negative consequences of developing a human-like AI. If you haven’t seen the movie yet, definitely plan to catch it in theatres.

Ryan is a screenwriting professor at the University of Tampa and works in creative services in live themed entertainment. If you like this article, check out the others and FOLLOW this blog!

Follow him!

Twitter: RLTerry1

Instagram: RL_Terry

Thrillz (theme parks): Thrillz.co