Varför gjorde Nathan, i "Ex Machina", det?

1

Jag frågade en version av denna fråga ( här ) och fann att det hade blivit ombedd flera gånger. ( här , here , här ) Ett av de konsekventa svaren var

she was always going to do it. She was always the monster.

men implicit i det är

Nathan knew it and allowed it to proceed. Doesn't he say that at one point?

Varför skulle Nathan göra det?

- he seems to be a man with great zest for life, at the prime of his life, with the world at his fingers. He dances, sings, appreciates art, and all. He enjoys good food. He is in excellent health.
- he seems to have engineered his "retreat" against that, both geographically, in terms of transportation, through the access codes, and even via the power system. This was done at monumental expense because the MD Helicopter has a cruise speed of 154 mph and had been flying over Nathans property for hours - a property that is hundreds of miles across in size is a huge expense anywhere in the world.
- The engineering of Ava's arms and several other parts out of glass - so easily shattered - she is engineered to break easily, to be destroyed. This also speaks to his ongoing self-protective actions even in the recent past.
- he has prior experience with other models, so he has information about tendencies and such. He understands her will, her capability as a threat and consistently and unilaterally acts against it.
- in the end he, though likely drunk or hung-over, grabs the ideal tool and strikes at the vulnerable part immediately, without hesitation, and to large and cruel effect. That cannot be done without preparation and premeditation. Even at that state of the movie, his will to live against the "monster" was strong and intelligent.
- he records them when the power is off. This suggests ongoing distrust of Ava.

Den enda gissningen jag har, och den har inte stöd från showen, och det känns som ett mycket stort steg, är det

he fell in love with/gave his heart to an earlier version, then badly destroyed the relationship, and was trying over and over to re-create that her, until he got to the point where he realized that re-visitation was forever beyond his grasp.

Titeln föreslår också det lite i det:

The title of the movie is a kind of play on words is very "textbook" Hollywood. Is it "Ex machina" like ex-girlfriend or ex-wife? Ex can mean "out of" but it can also mean "former". (When I see this I think of Nathan as the former machine given a live heart. I don't want to think of Ava as the former machine who lost her heart but was given sentience and non-machine appearance ... but it fits too well to ignore. )

Finns det någon annan eller någon bra (eller båda) förklaring på varför han skulle göra vad han gjorde, för att konstruera omständigheterna för hennes flykt, i samband med hans motivationer, tidigare åtgärder mot det och tidigare erfarenhet av motivationen av ämnet? Varför skulle han göra det? Varför skulle och spelade han det spelet med Caleb och Ava?

    
uppsättning EngrStudent 31.10.2016 18:28

1 svar

4

Detta svarades av filmens författare och regissör, Alex Garland:

Interviewer: “If things hadn’t ended the way they ended, with Ava escaping, would Nathan have revealed his technology to the world?”
Alex Garland: I do [think he would have told the world]. What I think is that he was thinking “I can do one better than this machine. I can do at least one better.” But he’s also set himself a task, which is “I’m gonna keep doing this until they outsmart me.” And the point about being outsmarted is that you don’t know it’s happening as it’s happening.
Slashfilm.com, Alex Garland and Oscar Isaac Explain and Dissect the Ending of ‘Ex Machina’, Posted on Friday, April 24th, 2015 by Germain Lussier

Den betonade delen är viktig, Nathan insåg inte att det var det, det var den tid han fick "outsmarted" av Ava och så förutsåg han inte vad som hände, eller fortsatte med det ändå.

    
svaret ges 29.03.2017 06:13