Few films deserve a 1/10 rating and although I would like to rate this film as such, it would be unfair and slightly childish to do so. Sadly though, that's probably as positive as this review will get.
Now, where to begin? Maybe, we'll start with the positives. Visually, the film was relatively pleasing to the eye: the geographical location looked amazing and some of the lighting work was pretty good. And I feel there was a great deal of potential within this film, there really was, but due to its execution and direction, its potential was left unrealised.
Ok, positives now done, onto the negatives, of which there are many. Firstly, Domhnall Gleeson (aka 'Caleb'), the films protagonist, provides such an abysmal job of 'acting', it is quite shocking. Everything about him was bad: Line delivery, dialogue, emotion, physical movements and actions... All were dreadful. Without a hint of hyperbole you can find comparable acting quality in a children's Christmas Nativity play. His performance really was THAT bad. And this truly terrible performance sadly leached into almost all other aspects of the film, making them maybe far worse than they otherwise would have been.
Emotion-wise, at no point did I feel any tension. The dialogue was so 'on the nose' that I had to be careful not to dislocate my eyeballs due to their constant rolling. The film's antagonist, Nathan (Oscar Isaac), is 'that-good-a-tech-wizard' that he managed to hack "every" webcam and mobile phone camera in the world. Oh purleez, that's a plot device straight out of Dr Evil's 101 Guide to being Evil. And for the audience to under how rich the villain is, the film begins with Caleb being transported by helicopter to Nathan's lab / house, with the pilot commenting that for the "last two hours" they'd been flying over all the land that Nathan owns. Yeah, we get it, this chap is rich. But wait, where has this plot device been seen before? Oh yeah, in Moonraker when James Bond is being flown by helicopter to Hugo Drax's residence. And I'm afraid to say even Moonraker provides far more competent acting and an infinitely better story than Ex Machina does.
Onto the basics of film making (or even just story telling), films typically - emphasis on this - include set-ups and pay-offs throughout but in Ex Machina, things just, well, happen. Nathan is always lifting weights but for no discernible reason. The same goes for alcohol; the villian is always just drinking. Admittedly, this leads to one of the most embarrassing, hit-you-in-the-face-it's-that-obvious payoffs that I wouldn't call it a pay-off at all. It was like something straight out of a Famous Five mystery and their method of catching the bad guy, although this is probably a deep insult to Enid Blyton. Then there's a comment about how the complex in which the film takes place does not any windows. Did this play any further part in the film in any important way? Um, no... No situation where an urgent escape through a window needed, no feelings of claustrophobia, no sense of being trapped, no feeling of any kind really.
Chemistry wise, due to the characters all being laughably bad you are incapable of relating to any of them, thereby creating the worst thing a film can do: making the viewer not care. Who was I supposed to be rooting for? Caleb, the wooden patsy, who has no character, perhaps? Or Nathan, the evil genius, who's just a bit of an arse but for no clear reason? Or maybe the AI / robot, the actor of which who is incapable of showing, or even portraying, genuine emotion in order to make us believe there's a human conscious inside?
Unfortunately I could go on and on but I'm running out of available characters so I'll now summarise:
Story: Laughably simplistic and unconvincing, particular for the film's subject matter. Mystery or intrigue: None. Tone: All over the place. Acting: Bad. Dialogue: Extremely Bad. Cast's Chemistry: MIA. Visuals: Quite nice. Audio: Good but didn't have the film to complement it
Overall, Ex Machina felt like an attempt at creating an AI-themed, stylistic film, interwoven with mystery and a love story. Unfortunately, it failed in nearly every regard, with responsibility for this failure sitting squarely with the Writer-Director, Alex Garland.
My advice: Watch Blade Runner 2049 instead. Or Wall-E
Now, where to begin? Maybe, we'll start with the positives. Visually, the film was relatively pleasing to the eye: the geographical location looked amazing and some of the lighting work was pretty good. And I feel there was a great deal of potential within this film, there really was, but due to its execution and direction, its potential was left unrealised.
Ok, positives now done, onto the negatives, of which there are many. Firstly, Domhnall Gleeson (aka 'Caleb'), the films protagonist, provides such an abysmal job of 'acting', it is quite shocking. Everything about him was bad: Line delivery, dialogue, emotion, physical movements and actions... All were dreadful. Without a hint of hyperbole you can find comparable acting quality in a children's Christmas Nativity play. His performance really was THAT bad. And this truly terrible performance sadly leached into almost all other aspects of the film, making them maybe far worse than they otherwise would have been.
Emotion-wise, at no point did I feel any tension. The dialogue was so 'on the nose' that I had to be careful not to dislocate my eyeballs due to their constant rolling. The film's antagonist, Nathan (Oscar Isaac), is 'that-good-a-tech-wizard' that he managed to hack "every" webcam and mobile phone camera in the world. Oh purleez, that's a plot device straight out of Dr Evil's 101 Guide to being Evil. And for the audience to under how rich the villain is, the film begins with Caleb being transported by helicopter to Nathan's lab / house, with the pilot commenting that for the "last two hours" they'd been flying over all the land that Nathan owns. Yeah, we get it, this chap is rich. But wait, where has this plot device been seen before? Oh yeah, in Moonraker when James Bond is being flown by helicopter to Hugo Drax's residence. And I'm afraid to say even Moonraker provides far more competent acting and an infinitely better story than Ex Machina does.
Onto the basics of film making (or even just story telling), films typically - emphasis on this - include set-ups and pay-offs throughout but in Ex Machina, things just, well, happen. Nathan is always lifting weights but for no discernible reason. The same goes for alcohol; the villian is always just drinking. Admittedly, this leads to one of the most embarrassing, hit-you-in-the-face-it's-that-obvious payoffs that I wouldn't call it a pay-off at all. It was like something straight out of a Famous Five mystery and their method of catching the bad guy, although this is probably a deep insult to Enid Blyton. Then there's a comment about how the complex in which the film takes place does not any windows. Did this play any further part in the film in any important way? Um, no... No situation where an urgent escape through a window needed, no feelings of claustrophobia, no sense of being trapped, no feeling of any kind really.
Chemistry wise, due to the characters all being laughably bad you are incapable of relating to any of them, thereby creating the worst thing a film can do: making the viewer not care. Who was I supposed to be rooting for? Caleb, the wooden patsy, who has no character, perhaps? Or Nathan, the evil genius, who's just a bit of an arse but for no clear reason? Or maybe the AI / robot, the actor of which who is incapable of showing, or even portraying, genuine emotion in order to make us believe there's a human conscious inside?
Unfortunately I could go on and on but I'm running out of available characters so I'll now summarise:
Story: Laughably simplistic and unconvincing, particular for the film's subject matter. Mystery or intrigue: None. Tone: All over the place. Acting: Bad. Dialogue: Extremely Bad. Cast's Chemistry: MIA. Visuals: Quite nice. Audio: Good but didn't have the film to complement it
Overall, Ex Machina felt like an attempt at creating an AI-themed, stylistic film, interwoven with mystery and a love story. Unfortunately, it failed in nearly every regard, with responsibility for this failure sitting squarely with the Writer-Director, Alex Garland.
My advice: Watch Blade Runner 2049 instead. Or Wall-E
Tell Your Friends