What's new

I did not dislike Battlefield Earth

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Wait - I don't disagree with you but there are other definitions that work and have appropriate meanings. I don't see that as a conflict. What is unknown is Alex's intent. His definition. I looked at several interviews with Alex to see if he gives any meaning for the title, to no avail. The below is fairly typical of the interviews he gave at the time. I guess I banked my choice on the concept that he's presenting Ava as being conscious, a former machine, but Alex never says Ava is or isn't conscious. He leaves that to the viewer of the movie to decide. So my choice of former machine may or may not be correct. Hence, I don't disagree with you.

In one of the interviews he discussed the pushback by Alicia about how she wanted to play the robot, and she didn't want to portray it as a clunky jerky traditional robot, but she wanted every movement to be perfect. He went with that contribution on her part. In that choice I see your definition over mine. Mimsey

Unlike most films about artificial intelligence, Ex Machina isn't about technological anxiety. "The anxiety in this film is much more directed at the humans," director Alex Garland tells NPR's Audie Cornish. "It was more in defense of artificial intelligence."

Garland tackled the zombie apocalypse as the writer behind the film 28 Days Later. In Ex Machina — his first film as director — he introduces us to Ava, a creation that is part woman and part machine. There's no hiding that Ava is a machine — but a very, very smart one.

"It's almost like a sort of post-Turing test," Garland says, referring to the test of whether or not a human can tell when they are interacting with a machine. Traditionally the Turing test was a blind one: "The machine would be on the other side of a closed door ... and there'd be a bunch of controls and if the human was tricked into believing they were interacting with another human rather than a machine, then the test was deemed to have been passed."

But the test in Ex Machina is different. "The machine is presented clearly as a machine," Garland explains. "There's no attempt to hide that it might be a machine. And it's really just a test to see if the machine has sentience or a humanlike consciousness."

Ex Machina raises questions about how we define consciousness, and how our instincts about consciousness may mislead us. And it also recasts what the face of artificial intelligence might look like. Garland explains that he used the film's sound design to give a "slightly nursery" quality to the character. It's "intended to present Ava the machine as having a kind of innocence, a sort of undamaged, untarnished quality," he says.

More at link. https://www.npr.org/2015/04/14/3996...ce-than-artificial-intelligence-in-ex-machina

Dude! It's times like this I think you are trolling, that you cannot be serious.

In any case, if you are really that confused, let me point something out:

1. The English language comes with a lovely instruction manual called a dictionary.
2. There is no debate about what the term EX MACHINA means, except in your own head.​
3. One of the rules of speaking English is that you don't get to make up definitions for words.​
4. However there is no specific rule that prevents you from being confused and obstinate, so splurge on that.​

HELPFUL TIP: Here is your absurd logic. Somebody makes a movie called "THE THIN RED LINE:​

51VB0J451VL.jpg

There is no debate about what the title means. It is an expression in the English language that has a well-established definition. Literate people know what it means or have the ability to look up the reference. It is analogous to "THE THIN BLUE LINE" descriptive about police, wherein the color blue represents cops blue uniform and how they represent a very thin line indeed that separates the vicious criminals of society--and prevents/protects the citizens from becoming their victims. MORE AT THIS LINK.

Nobody has any problem understanding what the word "RED" means. But you come along and start debating it, acting like there is so much confusion swarming about it's meaning, LOL. Only you are confused (or trolling).

Then someone gives you an explanation of what the word "red" means--and provides a link to the word "red" in the dictionary. It's a color. (That was hard, right? LOL)

But this doesn't satisfy you. Then you begin posting nonsensical things that say "While I wholeheartedly AGREE that it is a color, the title of the movie ACTUALLY means something else. The word "red" means "a really small font". You then go on to cut-n-paste dictionary contents that show that the word "red" is a homonym for the word "read".

Then you gleefully explain that the movie's director did not specify what he meant by "The Thin Red Line", so it is perfectly correct that it means someone read a "thin line" of print. Ergo, it means the font size was very small.

And then you begin cutting and pasting all kinds of mental case theories about how nobody really knows what the phrase means.

Dude, are you trying to convince us that you are really that stupid? Or just trolling? LOL

Try not making up your own definitions for words. You might begin to understand what others are talking about.

And if you shockingly discover that you don't understand something, why don't you just humbly learn it, instead of flamboyantly "resisting" knowledge, arguing that words don't have meanings and appearing entirely foolish?
 
Last edited:

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Also - I read somewhere one of the definitions of life is that it is self replicating. We see Ava taking parts off earlier versions of her self to complete herself, so she is clearly smart enough to self replicate, though she is clearly a machine.

An argument could be floated that neither of us are correct. She is a machine with self learning AI, but lacks a thetan. :roflmao:The title being a red herring.
No, Mimsey. An argument could not be floated.

Only an imbecile could float an argument that nobody can understand what the term EX MACHINA means.

Or a troll, who gets off on hearing themselves say incredibly clownish and stupid things.



.
 
Last edited:

Terril park

Sponsor
Wow, this post descended like a god from a machine.

Deus ex machina!
Don't know if this brit series has aired in the US.
Here is a clip of two of its stars being interviewed. They
play androids referred to as "Synths". They also talk of
"Synth" school where they learn how to act like androids
who also have god like characteristics. Its one of the best
series I've seen.


 

JustSheila

Crusader
Don't know if this brit series has aired in the US.
Here is a clip of two of its stars being interviewed. They
play androids referred to as "Synths". They also talk of
"Synth" school where they learn how to act like androids
who also have god like characteristics. Its one of the best
series I've seen.


Thanks, Terril! I was looking for a good, new television series to watch!
 
HH,

A) I didn't make up the definitions - I took them from the root as found in the Random House unabridged dictionary.

B) I asked an actor about it today and he said - Ex Machina? It's a shortened form of deus ex machina - man's playing god, and it back fires. I told him what you said, and he said he didn't see it that way.

However, I found this:
"Alex Garland spoke to this in an interview with TheFilmStage. The title quite literally means "The Machine" since ... er... that's what it's about, a machine.
FS: I’ve read quite a few interviews with you about this film but I’ve yet to really see anyone ask you about the title itself. Ex Machina. Taken from Deus Ex Machina, so all it means is The Machine?
AG Yes, precisely. If you take the prefix, the Deus Ex, it implies the god out of the machine.
TFS: I think a title is incredibly important.
AG: I agree, yeah.
TFS: Did you get any pushback on the title?
AG: We did indeed. There were some people that felt the title was a bad idea. It’s not well known. People don’t know how to pronounce it. I really liked this title but I don’t have the power to fight for it that hard. A couple of people involved in the film, with Scott Rudin in particular and one of the financiers, just decided that it was the right thing to do and to support the title. The evidence that was used that finally managed to convince people to go with the title was the movie Prometheus. They figured if they could make Prometheus work, people would buy into Ex Machina. But in truth, if I’m being totally candid, the fact is that this is a really low-budget film and probably they just didn’t care that much.

He also spoke a little about the wider implications in this interview with IO9

We asked Garland if this movie was intentionally about an abusive childhood, and the idea that we’ll raise A.I.s the same way we raise human children, abusively. “That’s a really complicated question, and it’s got a complicated answer,” said Garland.

“Basically—if I can go back a step—you might know that Ex Machina comes from a larger phrase, which was “deus ex machina,” and the deus bit of that is God. And this title drops ‘God’ out of it. And some of my thinking ran along the lines of this... We typically present creation stories as cautionary tales, saying ‘Man should not meddle in God’s work. And I wasn’t interested in the ‘God’ part of it. So hence taking ‘God’ out of the title.”

https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/47438/what-does-ex-machina-mean

Mimsey
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
HH,

A) I didn't make up the definitions - I took them from the root as found in the Random House unabridged dictionary.

B) I asked an actor about it today and he said - Ex Machina? It's a shortened form of deus ex machina - man's playing god, and it back fires. I told him what you said, and he said he didn't see it that way.

However, I found this:
"Alex Garland spoke to this in an interview with TheFilmStage. The title quite literally means "The Machine" since ... er... that's what it's about, a machine.
FS: I’ve read quite a few interviews with you about this film but I’ve yet to really see anyone ask you about the title itself. Ex Machina. Taken from Deus Ex Machina, so all it means is The Machine?
AG Yes, precisely. If you take the prefix, the Deus Ex, it implies the god out of the machine.
TFS: I think a title is incredibly important.
AG: I agree, yeah.
TFS: Did you get any pushback on the title?
AG: We did indeed. There were some people that felt the title was a bad idea. It’s not well known. People don’t know how to pronounce it. I really liked this title but I don’t have the power to fight for it that hard. A couple of people involved in the film, with Scott Rudin in particular and one of the financiers, just decided that it was the right thing to do and to support the title. The evidence that was used that finally managed to convince people to go with the title was the movie Prometheus. They figured if they could make Prometheus work, people would buy into Ex Machina. But in truth, if I’m being totally candid, the fact is that this is a really low-budget film and probably they just didn’t care that much.

He also spoke a little about the wider implications in this interview with IO9

We asked Garland if this movie was intentionally about an abusive childhood, and the idea that we’ll raise A.I.s the same way we raise human children, abusively. “That’s a really complicated question, and it’s got a complicated answer,” said Garland.

“Basically—if I can go back a step—you might know that Ex Machina comes from a larger phrase, which was “deus ex machina,” and the deus bit of that is God. And this title drops ‘God’ out of it. And some of my thinking ran along the lines of this... We typically present creation stories as cautionary tales, saying ‘Man should not meddle in God’s work. And I wasn’t interested in the ‘God’ part of it. So hence taking ‘God’ out of the title.”

https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/47438/what-does-ex-machina-mean

Mimsey
Seriously?

This conversation is way too stupid for me to continue it.

You are asking actors what the word means because they are experts? LOL LOL LOL

This is of those times that you compellingly convinced me that you cannot possibly be that stupid and therefore you are trolling.

Good luck with your epic struggle to unlock the unsolvable mystery of what the term Ex Machina means. You are the only one who has attained the advanced level where a simple term is unknowable, congratulations.

Holy hell, I am actually cringing at myself for the pointless exercise of trying to have a normal conversation with you, LOL.


ps: On second thought, it is really smart that you consulted a scholar on what the movie title "Ex Machina" means. An actor would be an expert, you're right---because the term was used in a movie title and actors act in movies. So the connection is logical, both have something to do with movies, so actors' opinions are very vital to solving this utter mystery. I consulted another scholar today, who disagrees with your scholar. I consulted a grocery store clerk who was stocking the shelves. Although he is only 16 and never saw the movie or heard of the movie or the term "Ex Machina", he disagreed with your actor. He stated: "I think the term means whatever people feel it should mean and we should not discriminate against anyone!" The reason he is an expert on this subject is because in his professional life as a stock-boy he sometimes puts popcorn bags on the shelves. And movie theaters also have popcorn---so the connection is obviously quite relevant!

.



 
Last edited:
We were talking about Sci Fi films we liked and I thought I'd ask. He knew the term - no hesitation. I thought you'd find his interpretation interesting - after all you were asking me the self same question - what does the title Ex Machina mean? So, I faithfully reported his response for your amusment.

Mimsey
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
We were talking about Sci Fi films we liked and I thought I'd ask. He knew the term - no hesitation. I thought you'd find his interpretation interesting - after all you were asking me the self same question - what does the title Ex Machina mean? So, I faithfully reported his response for your amusment.

Mimsey
I was asking you to see if you knew what it meant.

You thought I was asking you because I didn't know and I needed your help with word clearing? LOL
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
We were talking about Sci Fi films we liked and I thought I'd ask. He knew the term - no hesitation. I thought you'd find his interpretation interesting - after all you were asking me the self same question - what does the title Ex Machina mean? So, I faithfully reported his response for your amusment.

Mimsey

.

Mimsey, here is what you posted:

B) I asked an actor about it today and he said - Ex Machina? It's a shortened form of deus ex machina - man's playing god, and it back fires. I told him what you said, and he said he didn't see it that way.
You are very slightly correct, in the narrow sense that your actor's "expert opinion" was for my amusement. But not the way you intended it.

The actor's scholarly opinion on the term "ex machina" has nothing whatsoever to do with the conversation I was having with you about why the MOVIE was TITLED "Ex Machina".

The term Ex Machina does not mean "man's playing god". It means the exact opposite of that. In Greek/Roman plays it was GOD PLAYING GOD, being lowered to the stage in the play's final moments to solve humans' unsolvable problems.

And your actor's brilliant conclusion that "...and it backfires" is also the exact opposite of the definition of deus ex machina. The God being lowered from a machine in ancient plays SOLVES the problem. It doesn't backfire. I don't know how you can routinely conclude the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the information states, LOL. That's quite a feat.

Seriously, dude, you are so confused and lost, your thought process is an illogical abomination that is only solvable at this point if someone lowers God from a machine and cures you. LOL

HELPFUL TIP: 90% of your time and effort is in reading, cutting, pasting and talking about worthless information/factoids that are either unproven or already fully debunked. Why not consider taking that 90% wasted time/effort and dedicating it to finding some credible sources. And using all the extra time to try to understand what you are reading and writing about. The sheer volume of garbage information you regularly regurgitate is impressive. But, because you haven't bothered to research it or even understand it, your posts are 90% unreadable, illogical and a total waste of time. Focus, dude, focus. You are all over the map on your theories and wild leaps of logic. Try, if you can, to find ONE thing that is true and build upon it. It's called "reason". Yet, here you are, trying to school others on the unknowable-ness of the term "ex machina" when that term has already been perfectly defined and known to all for thousands of years. Please tell us it's some kind of practical joke you are playing to pretend to be so bewildered about a simple term, LOL.
.
 
Last edited:

freethinker

Sponsor
HH,

A) I didn't make up the definitions - I took them from the root as found in the Random House unabridged dictionary.

B) I asked an actor about it today and he said - Ex Machina? It's a shortened form of deus ex machina - man's playing god, and it back fires. I told him what you said, and he said he didn't see it that way.

However, I found this:
"Alex Garland spoke to this in an interview with TheFilmStage. The title quite literally means "The Machine" since ... er... that's what it's about, a machine.
FS: I’ve read quite a few interviews with you about this film but I’ve yet to really see anyone ask you about the title itself. Ex Machina. Taken from Deus Ex Machina, so all it means is The Machine?
AG Yes, precisely. If you take the prefix, the Deus Ex, it implies the god out of the machine.
TFS: I think a title is incredibly important.
AG: I agree, yeah.
TFS: Did you get any pushback on the title?
AG: We did indeed. There were some people that felt the title was a bad idea. It’s not well known. People don’t know how to pronounce it. I really liked this title but I don’t have the power to fight for it that hard. A couple of people involved in the film, with Scott Rudin in particular and one of the financiers, just decided that it was the right thing to do and to support the title. The evidence that was used that finally managed to convince people to go with the title was the movie Prometheus. They figured if they could make Prometheus work, people would buy into Ex Machina. But in truth, if I’m being totally candid, the fact is that this is a really low-budget film and probably they just didn’t care that much.

He also spoke a little about the wider implications in this interview with IO9

We asked Garland if this movie was intentionally about an abusive childhood, and the idea that we’ll raise A.I.s the same way we raise human children, abusively. “That’s a really complicated question, and it’s got a complicated answer,” said Garland.

“Basically—if I can go back a step—you might know that Ex Machina comes from a larger phrase, which was “deus ex machina,” and the deus bit of that is God. And this title drops ‘God’ out of it. And some of my thinking ran along the lines of this... We typically present creation stories as cautionary tales, saying ‘Man should not meddle in God’s work. And I wasn’t interested in the ‘God’ part of it. So hence taking ‘God’ out of the title.”

https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/47438/what-does-ex-machina-mean

Mimsey
You know I read on a forum once that it meant "Hand Of God", is that true?
 

freethinker

Sponsor
Don't know if this brit series has aired in the US.
Here is a clip of two of its stars being interviewed. They
play androids referred to as "Synths". They also talk of
"Synth" school where they learn how to act like androids
who also have god like characteristics. Its one of the best
series I've seen.


I watched a portion of an older woman being sent an orange which was there to assist her for the duration of her life which was referred to as a contract. The woman slammed the door in its face. She wasn't keen on having it around.

The creepy part is the bonding which is referred to as security. You have to bond with these things in order to establish security but who is the security for?

This is closer to reality than you may think, the melding of man and machine is a goal of some misguided types that think this is how man advances in evolution.

Ray Kurzweil is one of these types and is at the forefront of AI at MIT. he has all his fathers remaining personal effects stored in boxes and believes he can bring his father back through AI and Androids. He is an emotionless man who only cracks a hint of a smile at bringing dad back.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
You know I read on a forum once that it meant "Hand Of God", is that true?
LOL

Yes I agree with you, deus ex machina means "hand of God".

However, to get a scholar's opionon on the word "machina"--I asked a machinist who has repairs toasters and he said that deus ex machina actually means "...a God that was formerly a machine". He said that "ex" means 'used to be'.

So, even though I agree that it means "hand of God", what is really means is something else entirely. I know this sounds confusing and you are wondering how I can agree with two contradictory definitions. The answer to that is that I am double-tasking (look up the term).

Now that I think about it, deus ex machina also means "double tasking" if you realize that a machine can actually take on the beingness of a God.

But really, nobody knows what deus ex machina means, so whatever is a real definition to you is what's real.

I just got another opinion that totally agrees with my view of what deus ex machina means---the UPS delivery guy who just dropped off a package listened to what I had to say about the term deus ex machina. As I say, he totally agreed and indicated such by staring at me with a weird expression before he said: "Whatever you say buddy". So, obviously that weird expression on his face was from me briefing him and the mindblowing cognition that resulted.
 
"But really, nobody knows what deus ex machina means, so whatever is a real definition to you is what's real." Not so - it is as you say, the original meaning was: a god was lowered from a crane to solve an unsolvable situation in a play, sometimes for comic effect. However, the term has morphed into the Hand of God meaning - It is a literary device - a solution to an unsolvable plot problem from an tangential agency. Here's the def from Merriam Webster:

deus ex machina noun
de·us ex ma·chi·na | \ˈdā-əs-ˌeks-ˈmä-ki-nə,-ˈma-, -ˌnä;-mə-ˈshē-nə
Definition of deus ex machina
1
: a god introduced by means of a crane (see crane entry 1 sense 3a) in ancient Greek and Roman drama to decide the final outcome
2
: a person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deus ex machina

Examples:

Monty Python’s Life of Brian: In a comedic twist, the Biblical-era hero Brian falls off a tower and is saved by a spaceship of aliens flying by.

Lord of the Rings: Magical, gigantic eagles arrive to save Gandalf when he is trapped on top of a tower by evil wizard Saruman with no hope of escape.

Raiders of the Lost Ark: The Nazis tie Indiana Jones and his companion Marion up to a pole to watch them open up the “Ark of the Covenant;” when they open it, however, angels of death emerge and kill all the Nazis and a flame consumes everything except Indiana Jones and Marion (indeed, it just burns the ropes off that tied them to the pole).

Jurassic Park: Just when the humans are surrounded by velociraptors and are surely going to die, the tyrannosaurus rex charges in and kills the velociraptors, but not the humans.

See this link for more info, or google literary devices - deus ex machina http://www.literarydevices.com/deus-ex-machina/
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
HH posted: "But really, nobody knows what deus ex machina means, so whatever is a real definition to you is what's real..." ---snipped for brevity---
Not so - it is as you say, the original meaning was: a god was lowered from a crane to solve an unsolvable situation in a play, sometimes for comic effect. However, the term has morphed into the Hand of God meaning - It is a literary device - a solution to an unsolvable plot problem from an tangential agency. Here's the def from Merriam Webster:
deus ex machina noun
de·us ex ma·chi·na | \ˈdā-əs-ˌeks-ˈmä-ki-nə,-ˈma-, -ˌnä;-mə-ˈshē-nə
Definition of deus ex machina
1
: a god introduced by means of a crane (see crane entry 1 sense 3a) in ancient Greek and Roman drama to decide the final outcome
2
: a person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deus ex machina
Examples:
Monty Python’s Life of Brian: In a comedic twist, the Biblical-era hero Brian falls off a tower and is saved by a spaceship of aliens flying by.
Lord of the Rings: Magical, gigantic eagles arrive to save Gandalf when he is trapped on top of a tower by evil wizard Saruman with no hope of escape.
Raiders of the Lost Ark: The Nazis tie Indiana Jones and his companion Marion up to a pole to watch them open up the “Ark of the Covenant;” when they open it, however, angels of death emerge and kill all the Nazis and a flame consumes everything except Indiana Jones and Marion (indeed, it just burns the ropes off that tied them to the pole).
Jurassic Park: Just when the humans are surrounded by velociraptors and are surely going to die, the tyrannosaurus rex charges in and kills the velociraptors, but not the humans.
See this link for more info, or google literary devices - deus ex machina http://www.literarydevices.com/deus-ex-machina/


Literal much?

Dude, what I wrote was an over-the-top parody. A ridiculolusly obvious spoof on your non-sequitur posts where you keep trying in vain to sell the idea that the term "deus ex machina" means so many different things to so many different people---and nobody can figure it out.

It wasn't an invitation for you to continue cutting-and-pasting those absurdly irrelevant links that nobody reads or has any interest in.

I already told you I'm not having this discussion with you any more because your replies are some kind of nonsensical SJW "RESISTANCE" to reality or something, lol.

Again, bye!

Look up the word "bye", do a clay demo or ask your actor friend what it means.

If you insist on continuing the conversation, you will be having it with yourself, posting "alone and in the dark", lol.
 
Last edited:
Dude! It's times like this I think you are trolling, that you cannot be serious.

In any case, if you are really that confused, let me point something out:

1. The English language comes with a lovely instruction manual called a dictionary.
2. There is no debate about what the term EX MACHINA means, except in your own head.​
3. One of the rules of speaking English is that you don't get to make up definitions for words.​
4. However there is no specific rule that prevents you from being confused and obstinate, so splurge on that.​

HELPFUL TIP: Here is your absurd logic. Somebody makes a movie called "THE THIN RED LINE:​

51VB0J451VL.jpg

There is no debate about what the title means. It is an expression in the English language that has a well-established definition. Literate people know what it means or have the ability to look up the reference. It is analogous to "THE THIN BLUE LINE" descriptive about police, wherein the color blue represents cops blue uniform and how they represent a very thin line indeed that separates the vicious criminals of society--and prevents/protects the citizens from becoming their victims. MORE AT THIS LINK.

Nobody has any problem understanding what the word "RED" means. But you come along and start debating it, acting like there is so much confusion swarming about it's meaning, LOL. Only you are confused (or trolling).

Then someone gives you an explanation of what the word "red" means--and provides a link to the word "red" in the dictionary. It's a color. (That was hard, right? LOL)

But this doesn't satisfy you. Then you begin posting nonsensical things that say "While I wholeheartedly AGREE that it is a color, the title of the movie ACTUALLY means something else. The word "red" means "a really small font". You then go on to cut-n-paste dictionary contents that show that the word "red" is a homonym for the word "read".

Then you gleefully explain that the movie's director did not specify what he meant by "The Thin Red Line", so it is perfectly correct that it means someone read a "thin line" of print. Ergo, it means the font size was very small.

And then you begin cutting and pasting all kinds of mental case theories about how nobody really knows what the phrase means.

Dude, are you trying to convince us that you are really that stupid? Or just trolling? LOL

Try not making up your own definitions for words. You might begin to understand what others are talking about.

And if you shockingly discover that you don't understand something, why don't you just humbly learn it, instead of flamboyantly "resisting" knowledge, arguing that words don't have meanings and appearing entirely foolish?
Why the mention of width. Wouldn't the title. DON'T CROSS THE RED LINE have been better? I am sure it would have been even easier to understand and would have sold more books
 
Top