Theory Portfolio- ‘Ex Machina’

Applying Feminist Film Theory & Psychoanalysis Film Theory to 'Ex Machine' (2014)

(December 2020)

---

Applying Feminist Film Theory to ‘Ex Machina’.

Feminist film theory concurs whether a film, by its form or ideology (politics), defers or subverts the patriarchal mainstream cinema and enhances the production of female narratives, by women themselves. It reads film texts as representations against, or away, from the the ‘Cinema of the Fathers’ and reads them in the (feminist) language created by feminist film critics.

‘Ex Machina’ follows programmer Caleb trialling genius Nathan’s new AI- Ava. Whilst the film has a main female character, the protagonist is male and the antagonist is also male, leaving Ava as the suspicious victim/villain throughout the film. The particular scene for this essay is between Caleb and Nathan, discussing Ava and her sexuality.

After meeting Ava, Nathans latest model of AI, Caleb confronts him (Nathan) on why he genders and gives sexuality to his creations. Ava is the literal embodiment of women being created in the image of man; woman being presented as what she ‘represents for man’ (Johnston, [1973], 2008, p121[i]).

The AI in Nathan’s home are created in order to represent his ingenious, his intelligence but are also created as the ‘Other’, both as women and ‘robots’ with “an opening in her legs, with a concentration of sensors”.

His creation of woman is for his fantasy of a perfectly designed woman- a mechanism created to serve him pleasure, both physically through sex and egotistically through their existence. Ava represents the ‘projected fantasy of the male gaze’[ii] (Mulvey, 1975, p19), proved by the notion of being designed in order to seduce Caleb. In context of film form, Ava is not only the product of Nathan and Caleb’s gaze but the viewers too, as we follow the narrative through Caleb’s perspective. The fantastical notion of mechanical women- or sex-bots- isn’t new in sci-fi but Ex Machina seems to take a cynical approach to conscious non- human beings. The film reads to its viewer as a perverse suggestion that artificial life is created to serve men’s primal (sexual) desires and could suggest it will do so due to man’s fascination with dominating the female image.

The projection of desire unto Ava by both men seems to become a driving force to the plot, a need for one man to ‘dominate’ her and the other to ‘protect’ her. Yet in this scene, it is her sexualisation that is at question, this female needs to be gendered in order to exist, according to her creator, she must hold obvious qualities (her robotic feminised body, her face, her voice, even her fragility) to show she is more than just a mechanism. Her gender is supposedly important to her existence, but her presence seems inherently passive- non-existent in the feminist sense of independent from the men in the narrative, making the males the dominant figures.

Throughout the film, once Caleb realises Ava has the capacity to have sex, he becomes more emotionally attached to her and treats her like a ‘regular’ woman, the film suggesting woman as ‘fetishistic object’ (Johnston, [1973], 2008, p121)[iii], is a classic film signifier of women in narratives only existing as catalyst for the male protagonist’s journey. But Caleb in this scene is weary of her ‘flirting’ and her sexual capacity. He asks Nathan if he gave Ava “sexuality as a diversion tactic”, this question implies there is a fear of manipulation, a worry of Caleb’s control, or power, in their relationship being took away if Ava is actually in possession of the phallus, perhaps.

‘Ex Machina’ doesn’t disrupt male bourgeois (Johnston, [1973], 2008, p124)[iv] film in this reading but does disrupt the form of ‘invisible’ representations of women (women as naturally passive, distressed side characters) by the character of Caleb questioning the motive behind male sexualisation of the female character(s) in the film, within this particular scene.

Applying Psychoanalysis Theory to ‘Ex Machina’.

Psychoanalytical theory is a Freudian method of investigating the interaction of conscious and unconscious elements of our minds (through dreams). It’s applied to film in order to uncover the subconscious associations audiences/directors make to ideas, images and the influences within the films themselves and politics that created said films.

‘Ex Machina’ follows programmer Caleb trialling genius Nathan’s new AI- Ava. Whilst the film has a main female character, the protagonist is male and the antagonist is also male, leaving Ava as the suspicious victim/villain throughout the film. The particular scene for this essay is between Caleb and Nathan, discussing Ava and her sexuality.

Ava, the humanoid, represents the abject in ‘Ex Machina’. The idea of her, and physical presence, is disturbing to the viewers as we know this mechanism isn’t human but passes so well as one. Creed describes the abject as ‘what separates human from non-human’[v] (1986, p45) and threatens (human) life, so must therefore be excluded from it. Ava as mechanism also references the ‘Automaton’[vi], a character that leaves an audience unrested unto if they are real or human.

Caleb experiences the ‘uncanny’ during this scene, he recognises human feelings of desire and sexuality but the being in which he experiences it with is a robot. Caleb’s interviewing of Nathan of why Ava had to be given sexuality suggests he’s engaging in a masochistic fantasy with Ava, due to his confusion and fear of her.

His persistent querying into the need for AI to be given gender and sexuality could be his need for confirmation or validation that it’s okay to be unconsciously stimulated by the idea of Ava, or of humanoids in general. Freud believed the Uncanny invoked an arousing sensation within us ‘that is frightening, strange and yet secretly familiar’ (Doughty & Wright, 2018, p161)[vii], Ava as AI and Caleb’s strong affliction to her suggests the Freudian complex of the Uncanny could relate to modern day ideas of sexual consciousnesses in beings beyond human evolution.

Caleb’s responses to Ava also suggest another psychoanalytical theory is present within this scene- Repression. Repression is defined as a ‘forgetting or ignoring of past events that were traumatic in some way…and pushing them out of your conscious’ (Doughty & Wright, 2018, p159). He never corrects Nathan’s sexualisation of Ava and the other AI but only becomes more curious. He does, however, become more defensive in his query that Nathan programmed Ava to flirt with him. The scene shows Caleb becoming more stressed at the topic and he begins to move around and sip his beer more often, the idea of Ava being formed for sex is so stressing to him because he feels it’s wrong, but his defence denies his true desires and feelings. The repression Caleb shows in this scene is later confirmed by his actions later in the film by being seduced into ‘freeing’ Ava, for context.

Because Ava isn’t human and doesn’t need sexuality as a “evolutionary reproductive need”, according to Caleb, he represses the unnatural desires he has for an abject, non-human beings and this was in fact dangerous for him to do, supported by his actions after this scene (trying to intoxicate Nathan, trying to ‘free’ Ava).

Nathan’s motive for creating his AI was in part scientific curiosity but also his narcissism, his need for control, the literal creation of new life makes him (as he quotes) ‘God-like’. Mulvey’s psychoanalytical theory suggests film form is narcissistic in how it only focuses on the anthropomorphic (2009, p17)[viii], anything other than human form is odd, non-mainstream. Narcissism also links to how we see film, how we attentively view films and the point-of-view we look from (patriarchal). Nathan could be creating women as ‘the lack’ in order to remain the dominant figure, literally creating the AI to have “an opening” in their legs. Freud suggests that power is phallocentric and patriarchal, the only person who held the phallus in Nathans home is, therefore, him. To answer Caleb’s question of “why give them sexuality”, it was in order for Nathan to remain at the height of the symbolic order in his home that he shared with non-human, intelligent machines.

How this scene presents itself as psychoanalytical is that is renders itself to the unconscious. In how both Nathan and Caleb assume sexuality of themselves and Ava in anthropomorphic and patriarchal understandings. It elaborates on the theory through its lens into the mind of the male protagonists and they lend their views on Ava (and in turn, female sexuality) to their viewers.

References Creed, B. (1986). Horror & Monstrous Feminine: An Imaginary Abjection. SCREEN. 27 (1), 45. Doughty, R & Etherington-Wright, C (2018). Understanding Film Theory. 2nd ed. London: Red Globe Press. p161. Doughty, R & Etherington-Wright, C (2018). Understanding Film Theory. 2nd ed. London: Red Globe Press. p161. Johnston, C. (1973). Women's Cinema as Counter Cinema. In: Johnston, C Notes on Women's Cinema. London: Society for Education in Film and Television. p121-26. Johnston, C. (1973). Women's Cinema as Counter Cinema. In: Johnston, C Notes on Women's Cinema. London: Society for Education in Film and Television. p121. Johnston, C. (1973). Women's Cinema as Counter Cinema. In: Johnston, C Notes on Women's Cinema. London: Society for Education in Film and Television. p124. Mulvey, L. (2009). Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. In: N/A Visual and Other Pleasures. 2nd ed. USA: Palgrave Macmillan. p19. Mulvey, L. (2009). Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. In: N/A Visual and Other Pleasures. 2nd ed. USA: Palgrave Macmillan. p17