June 5, 2024 • 49 mins
Can you imagine a world where the lines between human and artificial intelligence blur beyond recognition? Join us and special guest Michael Tucker, creator of Lessons from the Screenplay and host of Beyond the Screenplay, as we delve into the mesmerizing world of "Ex Machina." Together, we dissect the film’s sleek storytelling, stunning cinematography, and complex themes, uncovering the nuanced layers that make this film a gripping exploration of consciousness and human interaction with AI.
We explore how the film's unique blend of thriller and sci-fi elements creates a cozy yet sinister atmosphere, enhancing the emotional journey of the protagonist, Caleb. This episode reveals how our understanding and engagement with "Ex Machina" evolves with repeated viewings and personal growth. Reflecting on how advancements in AI, like ChatGPT, influence our current perceptions of the film, we discuss its poignant and perhaps even prophetic insights into human-AI relationships. We also dive into the psychological and philosophical ramifications of AI creation and manipulation, drawing comparisons to similar themes in other media like "Black Mirror."
Michael Tucker shares his expert insights into the efficient and strategic storytelling of "Ex Machina," celebrating Alex Garland's directorial debut. We touch on the collaborative nature of filmmaking, comparing it to video game development, and ponder the challenges of adapting such a narrative into an interactive medium. From humorous anecdotes to deep technical breakdowns, this episode promises a thorough and engaging exploration for fans of the film and those fascinated by the intersection of cinema and artificial intelligence.
Notey Notes:
Join The Nut House Discord community!
Support The Film Nuts Podcast on Patreon!
Get in touch by emailing filmnutspodcast@gmail.com or following us on Instagram and TikTok @filmnutspodcast.
Watch The Film Nuts Podcast on Youtube
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Taylor D. Adams (00:00):
Hey folks, just a quick heads up that all
episodes of the Film Nutspodcast contain heavy spoilers
and some strong language.
Nothing too crazy, but makesure there's no one with
sensitive ears too close by.
And if you like what you heartoday, please consider becoming
a patron of the show.
You can find links to that pagein the show notes or you can
visit patreoncom slash film nuts.
Okay, Anyway, please enjoy theshow and thank you so much for
(00:22):
listening.
Clip (00:24):
I'm sorry, I don't understand.
Michael Tucker (00:28):
You shouldn't trust him, you shouldn't trust
anything he says.
Clip (00:38):
Power restored.
Michael Tucker (00:39):
Ex Machina is one of those movies that, for
whatever reason, just likepresses all my buttons.
The cinematography and just thevibe of the movie I really like
.
Like it's sleek but kind ofwarm and fuzzy and around the
edges it's sexy, it's cool, it'sa little playful, it's a little
dangerous.
It has kind of all of thethings that I like to have in
(01:03):
movies in one big package.
Taylor D. Adams (01:08):
Hi, I'm Taylor and welcome back to the Film
Nuts podcast, a show about whywe love what we watch.
I am so excited for today'sepisode for two reasons.
It's with someone whose workI've followed and admired for a
long time, and our film today isrife for discussion both from
the technical and emotionalsides of filmmaking.
(01:31):
A gorgeously well-crafted moviethat asks the audience
thought-provoking questions likewhat is consciousness?
Does the act of creation makeus gods and are robots hot?
I'm talking about 2014's ExMachina.
Written and directed by AlexGarland, this moody and cerebral
sci-fi story is both a filmdesigned to entertain as well as
(01:55):
make us, as the audience,active participants, at least
according to my guest today.
Michael Tucker is the creator ofthe YouTube channel Lessons
from the Screenplay and host ofthe podcast Beyond the
Screenplay both projects thatbreak down writing in film,
television and even video games.
And in addition to thesestory-focused projects, michael
(02:15):
is also a narrative designer inthe gaming industry.
So he's, you know, gotcredentials.
Michael and I chat about whatit's like being a techno
optimist what role AI could playfor those processing grief, and
could Ex Machina be turned intoa video game.
So let's tear up the dancefloor.
Here's Michael Tucker talkingabout Ex Machina on the Film
(02:37):
Nuts podcast.
Michael Tucker (02:40):
I'm in a new house.
It's very exciting.
It's hard to become a homeownerright now, especially in
California, especially in LA.
So I feel very lucky to havefound a house and I'm learning
very quickly all the things thatgo along with buying and
maintaining a house, likeinspections and contractors.
And you think you are going toget the dishwasher installed,
(03:02):
but then it needs an electricianand then it needs this other
thing.
Taylor D. Adams (03:10):
So it's crazy, but great Also.
At the same time, have youfallen through the ceiling?
Yet I have not fallen throughthe ceiling.
Okay, um, my second day in myhouse, I fell through the
ceiling.
Clip (03:17):
Uh.
Taylor D. Adams (03:19):
I misstepped in the attic and made a Taylor
shaped hole in the ceiling.
Clip (03:23):
It was perfect Uh and I was like well.
Taylor D. Adams (03:26):
I was mad and I was like, well, let's just get
it out of the way and then maybefrom there things will get
better, and now you have a greatstory about it.
Michael Tucker (03:34):
Yes exactly, exactly.
Taylor D. Adams (03:36):
Um, so yeah, like tell me all right.
So, first of all, I've beenfollowing your work both from
lessons from the screenplay andbeyond screenplay for years now.
I think it's really cool thatwe're having this conversation.
Um, but give me kind of I knowthis is going to kind of a
throwback and maybe you've beenasked this question multiple
times but give me kind of theimpetus as to why you started
(03:59):
these kind of uh, the this typeof content, deep diving into how
films are made and,specifically, how they're
written.
Michael Tucker (04:07):
Yeah, the sort of shortest version of it is.
I've always wanted to be afilmmaker.
Since I was a kid I wanted towrite and direct, but mostly I
was focusing on the directingaspect.
And so, making movies in highschool and even college, I was
mostly thinking about directionand cool camera angles and all
(04:29):
the kind of fun, visible partsof filmmaking.
And so when I moved to LA andstarted to do, you know, some
shorts and commercials and wedid a web series and started to
get it in front of industrypeople, a lot of the feedback
was along the lines of thedirection is good and like
(04:50):
clever ideas are here, but thewriting isn't there.
And so I had to hear thatmultiple, multiple times until
finally it got through and I waslike, oh, I never actually paid
attention to what makes writinggood, so my writing isn't good.
Maybe I should do that if Iwant my writing to be good.
And so that realization camearound the same time that video
(05:13):
essays were a very big thing,every painting, obviously nerd
writer, et cetera.
And so I just kind of had thisidea of like, well, I want to
read a bunch of screenplays tolearn all the writing things and
maybe I can do a blog where Isummarize my findings.
And as soon as I startedwriting my first blog post, I
was like, oh no, this should bea video essay that will help
(05:36):
other people get it and force meto internalize this, because in
order to teach it, you have tounderstand it better.
Internalize this, because inorder to teach it, you have to
understand it better.
And so that was kind of theimpetus for starting.
Lessons from screenplay is likehere's a way to force myself to
read and analyze movies indepth, learn these lessons and
then share it with people.
(05:58):
And luckily it all kind of tookoff and was enough to become my
full-time job for several years.
So, uh, yeah.
So that was kind of thebeginning of the channel.
And then, a couple years intothat, as I was building out the
team, I'd met a bunch of reallycool also, uh, people that were
into film analysis and nerdslike me.
They were helping write andedit the videos for the channel
(06:20):
and we were like we like talkingabout movies, let's do a
podcast.
And it was like, well, yeah,but everyone says that.
But it was like, but maybe thiscould be like you know.
So we went for it and thenthat's been super fun, and so
we've been doing that ever sincetoo.
So that's kind of the at themain thrust of the channels.
Taylor D. Adams (06:39):
That's awesome and okay, I I don't know if I'm
making this up or if I'm right,but was the first video essay on
Ex Machina.
Michael Tucker (06:47):
It wasn't, but it was an early one.
So Gone Girl was the very firstvideo.
That's right.
Ex Machina was like 11.
For some reason that numberlike sticks out to me.
I hope I'm right about that,but yeah, it was a very early
video.
Taylor D. Adams (07:02):
I mean you made so many.
It's totally fine if we don'tremember the older things.
I could have sworn for somereason.
But yeah, gone Girl, that was agreat one too.
But that ruins my segue.
Michael Tucker (07:16):
But my segue is so why did you want to talk
about Ex Machina?
Ex Machina is one of thosemovies that, for whatever reason
, just like presses all mybuttons, like it just hits all
of the sweet spots for me whereit's this contained thriller
with just a few characters.
I love how simple the narrativeis and it's all about trust and
(07:38):
this kind of cat and mouse gameof you know who's good, who's
bad, who's a robot, who's not arobot.
Like there's all thesequestions and you're leaning's
good, who's bad, who's a robot,who's not a robot.
Like there's all thesequestions and you're leaning
forward and it's just like acouple people in this one
location are you building an ai?
Clip (07:53):
I've already built one and over the next few days you're
going to be the human componentin the turing test.
Holy shit, yeah, that's right,caleb, you got it, because if
that test is passed, you aredead center of the greatest
scientific event in the historyof man.
If you've created a consciousmachine, it's not the history of
(08:16):
man, that's the history of gods.
Michael Tucker (08:20):
And it's sci-fi.
I'm a sci-fi nerd, so there'slike those elements there and
the cinematography and just thevibe of the movie I really like,
like it's sleek but kind ofwarm and fuzzy and around the
edges it's like it's sexy, it'scool, it's a little playful,
it's a little dangerous, like itjust it has kind of all of the
(08:44):
things that I like to have inmovies and one big package, and
so I just immediately loved itwhen I saw it the first time.
Taylor D. Adams (08:52):
I think, I think the, as you were kind of
going through the contrastingfeelings of it I immediately
thought of like cozy andsinister at the same time.
Like that's kind of what itfeels like watching this.
At the same time, like that'skind of what it feels like
watching this.
Um, so you have a video essayabout this movie.
You've seen it multiple times.
You have a podcast episodeabout this movie.
This is one of your favoritemovies of the 2010s.
(09:12):
I assume you've seen it morethan once.
So with each, like, what wasyour reaction the first time you
saw it?
Do you remember?
Like, who were you with?
Who was Michael Tucker?
Like what was going on?
Michael Tucker (09:27):
who were you with?
Who was michael tucker, likewhat was going on?
Yeah, so I do remember.
Uh, I saw it with alex cayeros,one of our co-hosts at beyond
the screenplay and who helpsit's basically like my creative
partner and all thingsfilmmaking, um and I didn't know
much about the movie.
He, I think, was the one thatwas like it's this new a24 movie
, it's gonna be cool, let's justgo see it.
And I was like okay, and so Iwent in pretty much blind and
was pretty immediately swept upin it and just the whole time
(09:52):
was waiting for it to be bad andit kept not being bad and just
like kept being like more thingsthat I wanted and so by the end
, I was like that was amazing,like I really enjoyed that
experience.
I was not expecting that and,yeah, I feel like it was coming
at a time when sort of my, mytastes were evolving.
(10:13):
I've talked a lot about likebeing a big fincher fan and I
think around this time was whenI was starting to be like
appetite, like fincher has likemaybe too many control issues,
like things in fincher world area little bit too tight and a
little too perfect, and I feellike this movie feels like that,
but softened a little bit.
(10:34):
So the the filmmaking, the shotsare still precise and there's
intention behind it, but it'salso a little bit more loose and
organic and so, yeah, tastewise, it just felt like, oh,
this is like the new thing thatI want to pursue.
So, yeah, first time I wassuper, super into it and, yes,
(10:55):
as you said, I've seen it manytimes since then and, in making
the video essay, watched it overand over again and read the
screenplay, analyzed it, buthaven't really watched it start
to finish for, and read thescreenplay, analyzed it, uh, but
haven't really watched it startto finish for a couple years
now, and so part of why I wantedto talk about it was to force
myself to revisit it now, startto finish, and kind of see what
(11:17):
was different and what myreactions would be to it after
all this time.
Taylor D. Adams (11:24):
So what are your reactions to it after
seeing it for the millionth time, or whatever?
Michael Tucker (11:29):
Yeah, I still really really like it.
It's interesting.
I feel like there's kind ofbeen this arc with it of like it
was great and then maybe peoplewere poking at it and like,
even in our podcast episode thatwe recorded for beyond the
screenplay, I didn't feel likewe really got to have a full
(11:49):
conversation about it.
Like we sort of touched on acertain couple of issues but
landed in some conclusions aboutlike caleb and what the movie
was saying, that I like wasn'tquite sure that I agreed with
100%, and so watching it again,I kind of still have the same
feelings of like I think there'slots of room for interpretation
(12:13):
of a lot of things, and that'sone of the things I like about
the movie.
And, rather than concluding,this is what it's saying, or
that's what it's saying I'marriving at.
I think it's just putting someof these ideas out there for us
to react to as an audience.
The other thing I was curiousabout is our relationship with
AI is so different than it wasnine years ago when it came out,
(12:36):
and so now we have chat, gptand cloud and all these kind of
LLMs where you can interact withan AI as if it were a person,
and so I was wondering how itwould feel visiting a movie
about AI from nine years ago andin some ways it felt a little
dated, even because I think theperception of what AI can be and
(13:00):
how it can behave before thesekind of chat models was this
kind of more clinical, quiet,like I speak a little precisely
and I move like this because I'ma robot and I think our
relationship with AI is shakingthat up and going to continue
shaking that up.
So it felt old in some ways,but I still really enjoyed the
(13:24):
experience, still really lovethe performances.
Especially Oscar Isaac is sogreat in this cinematography.
All the things I loved about itI still love about it.
Taylor D. Adams (13:43):
I think that's really cool, that I mean this
this movie happens to be abouttechnology and the fact that
since it's came out, liketechnology has just evolved
exponentially.
Like not a lot of movies areabout something that ages as
like time goes on.
Some things are just about likea fixed moment, kind of history
.
Um, so, with your kind ofreflection on it now is there,
is there a part of you that haschanged, I guess, from the first
time you saw this, from thefirst time you saw this.
Michael Tucker (14:05):
Yes, I can't quite put a finger on what it is
, though I think I'm a.
I remember watching it thefirst time and kind of being
seduced along with Caleb.
Are you attracted to me?
What Are you attracted to me?
You give me indications thatyou are.
Clip (14:26):
I do yes.
How Micro-expressions.
Michael Tucke (14:30):
Micro-expressions the way your eyes fix on my
eyes and lips the way you holdmy gaze, or don't do you think
(14:52):
about me when we aren't together, like going on this journey of
like oh, that's a robot, I don'treally care about that robot,
and then by the end being likeI'm in love with ava, like yes,
we gotta like rescue her notquite that two dimensional, but
but essentially that and I feellike there was.
I have more distance from thatnow and part of that is just
(15:13):
seeing this movie so many times.
But also, I think just beingolder that's something I've
experienced when revisiting lotsof movies is like seeing them,
seeing a movie at different ages.
You relate to differentcharacters because you're sort
of, you know, in different lifephases and that kind of thing.
And so I felt less swept up inCaleb's psychology this time and
(15:40):
less vulnerable to that andmore intrigued by, I guess, the
greater, bigger questions thatmaybe, like Nathan was even
struggling with of, like thecreation of a new life form.
Does Nathan know that if hesucceeds it's going to mean that
he's dying right Like?
Does he know he's like rushingtoward his own demise?
(16:03):
Does he know he's like rushingtoward his own demise?
Like those kind of weightierquestions.
I think I was more intriguedand involved with this time than
the first time I watched it.
Clip (16:12):
Ava was a rat in a maze and I gave her one way out To
escape she'd have to useself-awareness, imagination,
manipulation, sexuality, empathy, and she did.
Now, if that isn't true, ai,what the fuck is?
So my only function was to besomeone she could use to escape.
Yeah, and you didn't select mebecause I'm good at coding.
(16:37):
No, well, no, I mean, you'reokay, you're even pretty good.
You selected me based on mysearch engine inputs.
Taylor D. Adams (16:47):
You obviously have an invested interest in
this movie, as we've said.
You've talked a lot about it ona lot of different platforms,
seen it multiple times.
Why do you think that this filmis so ripe for discussion?
Michael Tucker (17:05):
I mean, there's so much going on in it, but what
do you think about?
It lends to so many revisitsand discussions after the
revisits.
I think it's hits this kind ofperfect in between of it's vague
enough that you can wonder andask questions like it doesn't
quite answer everything, in alike wrapping it up with like a
little bow in terms of like whatthis meant or what this
person's intention really was.
So there's room for people todiscuss.
(17:27):
Well, I think ava was doingthis because of this reason, or
I think ava really did love himor whatever.
So I think there's there'senough room there for people to
kind of project themselves intoit and take you know, have
different takes.
I think the, the filmmaking, isalso just really interesting.
(17:48):
Like I, one of the reasons itwas fun to make a video about
this movie was the.
The differences between thescreenplay and the like final
product were, um, there weren'ta ton of them, but they were
notable differences and so therewas a lot, I think, kind of
(18:09):
found in the editing of themovie and I feel like there are
even these kind of montages thatI I get the sense were created
in the edit to kind of solvesome problems and fill some
holes and sometimes that cancause problems and take people
out of it.
I feel like in this movie itactually gives you room to stop
(18:32):
and think about what's justhappened and I think that is
part of why, when the movie ends, I think a lot of people have
like ideas in their heads orthings they want to talk about,
because they've had time toreally like process and try to
come to a conclusion about whatthey think was going on.
So I think it's this rightblend of vague and specific uh
(18:56):
that I don't know engenders uh,generates conversation and makes
people want to explore it moreuh, do you think you could ever
be tricked or seduced by AI?
So I don't think so, especiallynot 38 year old Michael, maybe
younger Michael, the one thatsaw this for the first time,
(19:17):
maybe you know I was thinkingabout this question because I
think it really depends on thesituation.
Where the situation in themovie, it's very clear that this
thing is a robot.
I think there is a reason thatyou would.
It'd be easy to remind yourselfthat you're being manipulated.
(19:41):
You're being manipulated ifsomeone were to create an exact
replica of a loved one of mine,such that I couldn't tell the
difference, or they just had thesame mannerisms and affect as
someone that I already caredabout.
That, I think, is where thevulnerability would come in,
because there's just you knowit's a replica of someone.
(20:02):
There's my mom as a robot form.
I think they're gonna shoot herin the head.
I don't know if it's really heror not, even if I know it's a
robot.
If it looks and acts just likemy mom, I'm gonna like.
There's an emotional reactionthat you just as a like a base
reptilian animal reaction, and Ithink that's one of the things
(20:23):
I find so fascinating in thismovie is that it's it's getting
at like there are certain justprimal things that we have as
humans that can be manipulated.
And so what happens when wemake something that can tap
directly into those primalthings and and our programming
essentially and use it againstus?
Clip (20:42):
Yeah.
Taylor D. Adams (20:43):
That's funny.
That reminds me of anotherDomino Gleason thing, the black
mirror episode, where he is aphysical AI recreation of his
actual self.
This is kind of weird, but ifthe technology ever advanced
like that and, god forbid,something happens Michael
Tucker's no longer with us Wouldyou be okay with your loved
(21:04):
ones resurrecting you as an AIbeing?
Michael Tucker (21:09):
um, that is a good question.
I think my immediate responseis if it helps them be happy, I
want them to do whatever theyneed to do to be happy.
Uh, I won't be around, sopeople can do whatever they want
.
I would never want to do thatto replace a loved one.
(21:31):
Um, but, yeah, I was thinkingabout that black mirror episode,
also, watching it this time,yeah, yeah, just realizing, yeah
, there are a lot ofsimilarities there and how
disturbing.
But also you can see, like, theappeal of, like you know, it
gets into questions of, likewhat even is a relationship and
(21:53):
what is consciousness, and howdo you know, you know, if you
could never tell the differencethat the person you were talking
to was a robot or not.
Does it matter?
Like all those, like thosequestions that spawn off I love
to think about and nerd outabout.
I have been playing around withAI and lots of different things
(22:14):
that I've been working on.
So, like, if I'm writingsomething or brainstorming
something using these you know,the chat, gpt models and cloud
and all these different things,mid journey, etc.
Like I've, I'm someone who'ssort of a techno optimist and
always curious about the newthing and like how can you use
it as a tool, and since so manyof these new AI tools seemed
(22:39):
geared toward creativity in away, that's, I think, unexpected
, I was very curious to playaround with it, and so I have
played around a lot with thosethings and I've had varying
levels of success with it.
And I'm happy that I haveplayed around a lot with those
things and I've had varyinglevels of success with it, and
I'm happy that I've playedaround with it, because I think
(22:59):
I'm not scared of it in a waythat you know, people that don't
understand, like, what'shappening under the hood or
haven't, like, really tested thelimitations of them, I think
there can be a fear around them,but occasionally I have used
LLM AI models to spur creativeideas, not really to create them
(23:20):
, but almost just like.
In some ways I've thought aboutit as like when Alex and I my
creative partner arebrainstorming ideas.
Sometimes you just need to saysomething out loud to someone
and have them say something backat you and even if nothing they
say actually moves on to thenext round of brainstorming,
(23:41):
just that interfacing andinteraction can trigger new
ideas for you, and so the mostsuccessful things I think I've
had with ai are moments whereit's kind of doing that a little
bit.
Um, so yeah, but I'm it's weird.
The relationship that I have hadwith ai stuff has started with
(24:03):
excitement and like what's thisgoing to do?
This is going to unlockeverything, and then diving in
more and realizing, well,there's still a lot of
limitations and it can't reallydo all the things that we maybe
thought it could do.
And really the the harder workof being creative like you don't
want to replace that, likethat's, that's the part that the
(24:25):
human needs to do to makesomething, and so it's kind of
changed the way I look at them.
Can we use them to geteverything else out of the way
so that I can do the hard partof being creative and being
alone and brainstorming?
Um, yeah, so that's my kind ofgeneral spiel about AI.
Taylor D. Adams (24:45):
Yeah, I think, um, I've been using it.
Or just AI tools as more like.
Yeah, like you said, likesounding boards, basically, like
I have this thought, I don'tknow what it is.
Throw it in some kind of AImodel, see what spits back out,
and I'll either go, oh, that'sinteresting or no, that's awful.
I will not, I will then.
Then it triggers another ideathat ends up being even better.
(25:08):
So I totally get that.
So sorry for the interruption,but I will be brief.
I am so grateful that youdecided to listen to the Film
Nuts podcast today.
If you are enjoying what you'rehearing, please consider
supporting the show on Patreon.
With a small monthly amount,you can get access to behind the
scenes goodies, early access tofull episodes and you can vote
on what movie we watch the firstMonday of every month on the
Nuthouse Discord.
(25:29):
The Nuthouse itself is free tojoin and is full of other film
and TV lovers, so you'll fitright in.
You can check out info on allthese things in the show notes,
and if all of this sounds like abit too much, that's totally OK
.
But if you want to keep up todate on all our episodes, please
be sure and subscribe on yourfavorite platform of choice and
if you're listening on Applepodcast, go ahead and leave a
rating review so we can get infront of other awesome people
(25:51):
like yourself.
Ok, enough of me rambling Backto the good stuff.
So, with a lot of your creatorwork being about the written
word, like the literalscreenplay of this movie as well
as many others, and even onyour podcast, you have like a
lesson that you have from eachmovie that you all watch.
Is there something that youreally appreciate about how ex
(26:16):
machina is written?
Michael Tucker (26:18):
yeah, absolutely , I think it's.
I love how efficient and simplethe narrative is, the and I was
mentioning you know earlierthat some of that was found in
the editing and so I talk aboutthis in my video.
But the opening scene of ExMachina, you know we start on
(26:40):
Caleb.
He wins this prize, we know he'sgoing somewhere within two
minutes, we know the basic setupfor everything and he's on the
helicopter off to wherever he'sgoing, and so I love how just
efficient that inciting incidentis, like it doesn't waste any
time, it just gets us going sowe know generally where we're
going.
But we have all these questionsnow set up that we want
(27:02):
answered.
This movie is really greatabout asking questions and
implanting questions in theaudience's mind, and then that
helicopter scene in the scriptwas a very long scene of like
lots of exposition and the movie.
They just keep two lines ofdialogue yeah, I was gonna say
that scene lasted five seconds,I thought right, yeah, and I
(27:25):
think that's uh, yeah, that'sone of the things that I
appreciated when analyzing thevideo to when analyzing the
movie to make the video wasseeing those changes from script
to screen, that the scriptalready being efficient, but
then also seeing thosedifferences.
Um, I think that's a good way toto learn is compare and
(27:47):
contrast what the creatorthought was going to work and
then what actually ended upworking, what was changed, and
in that instance it was like aless is more, explaining too
much about like I won this prize.
I'm going to be staying herefor a week.
I don't know anything aboutthis print.
Like we don't need that laundrylist of things like less is
(28:08):
more.
That creates questions in ourin our head, um, um and yeah.
So I just love.
I love to study this movie forthose reasons, and there's also
a really cool edit change wherethere's a scene in the movie
where caleb uh, where nathanshows caleb how he designed ava
(28:30):
and sort of gives them like aquick tour of the lab here we
have her mind Structured gel.
Clip (28:40):
I had to get away from circuitry.
I needed something that couldarrange and rearrange on a
molecular level to keep its formwhen required.
Holding for memories, shiftingfor thoughts this is her
hardware wetware.
Michael Tucker (28:57):
That comes in a different place in the script.
I think it comes a little bitearlier and as part of kind of
the more of the onboarding partof the sequence right it's like
welcome, caleb, here's whatyou're gonna be doing like an
exposition dump pretty much yeah, yeah, and they moved it to be
(29:20):
after one of the ava sessions ina way that I think is really
smart because of you know thekind of with every ava session,
caleb's getting more and morepulled into you know, his kind
of uh, you know desire for her,you know swept obsession,
whatever you want to call it,and so they put that scene after
(29:41):
one of those, and so it createsthis kind of juxtaposition
where caleb is like gettingswept up and they're like, oh my
god, this is a person.
And then juxtaposed with a likehere's why she's not a person,
here's her brain, here's themechanical parts, and so I think
it just adds a a nice contrastand dynamic to Caleb's arc, to
(30:01):
kind of make it be a little bitmore going back and forth
between do I believe this is aperson?
Taylor D. Adams (30:08):
No, no, it can't be a person, but maybe I
do believe this is a person, andso I think having that dynamic
keeps it interesting andprevents it from just being like
a linear one, two, three, four,five kind of thing.
Yeah, I think, now that youmentioned it, that switch of the
explanation of like what ava'sbrain is I think also for the
audience, it gets us invested asto why we should care about the
(30:32):
science behind it, like we seeAva and get to know her as a
character, and then that we havethe explanation as to like why
she's different, which I thinkis pretty cool, cause, yeah,
like everyone's first instinctwhen they write a screenplay is
like to go like linear.
I remember in college videoproduction class, like everybody
had their own like assignmentand we were did like
(30:52):
storyboarding presentationsEvery single person's video
storyboard.
The first story shot of astoryboard was an alarm clock.
Like there were 12 people it'samazing and every single person
started with an alarm clock andafter the fourth one I was like,
oh, I think we're supposed torealize that we're doing this.
Let's try to switch things up.
(31:14):
So I think that's super justrefreshing when things kind of
like mix up the chronologywithout actually mixing up the
timeline.
I think it's pretty impossible.
Yeah, yeah, a hundred percent.
So this was Alex Garland's firstmovie that he both wrote and
directed Um.
Since then he's done four otherprojects, including a TV series
, Looking back at Ex Machina.
Michael Tucker (31:42):
Can you possibly sense kind of the trajectory
that he's gone on with hisprojects?
I think it's one of thosethings where in the moment when
it, when Ex Machina came out, itwas like there's multiple paths
forward that reality could take.
And now I'm kind of using likedevs language it's fitting.
It's fitting for thisconversation where it's like, oh
(32:02):
, this is like a new director.
This movie felt so intentionaland like, well rendered and the
storytelling is really great.
Was this an accident or is thisa new person that has this high
level of mastery that's goingto go on to make amazing things?
And I feel like that's oftenthe case when a new director
(32:24):
makes a movie and it's reallygreat.
It's like, is this going to bea pattern or is this a one-off?
And I think what's beeninteresting about Alex Garland's
directorial career is thatevery topic that he's made a
movie or series about I findreally interesting and I'm
always excited about seeingsomeone tackle things like
(32:45):
determinism or you know, thiskind of weird self-destructive,
psychedelic tour of whatever youknow annihilation was, so it's.
It's been interesting seeingthat trend continue of like
these interesting kind ofchallenging, subversive topics
(33:09):
and ideas being explored.
In his work, the directing, alot of the things that I really
like about ex machina havepersisted, like good
cinematography, interestingcamera choices.
I feel like the the life andfun that was in ex machina has
(33:32):
been absent for me and devs inannihilation anyway, and I
actually haven't seen uh men orcivil war so, and I think that
kind of says they're not fun, Imean there's no level of fun.
Taylor D. Adams (33:49):
I mean, I haven't seen civil war yet, but
yeah, there's no level of fun inmen.
I'll tell you that, yeah, soyeah, there's no level of fun in
men.
Michael Tucker (33:54):
I'll tell you that yeah, so yeah it's.
I think it's interesting tothen go back and see the seeds
of what would continue like arethere in Ex Machina.
Taylor D. Adams (34:11):
But I think that a lot of the things that
make this movie special andstand out to me, were not
brought along to some of some ofhis other work.
So yeah, alex Carlin recentlysaid that he's going to kind of
take a break from directing fora while for civil work kind of
focus a little bit more onwriting.
I mean, we can speculate allkinds of reasons, but do you,
what do you think about artistskind of voluntarily scaling back
(34:32):
responsibility in order to kindof like maybe focus on one
particular part of the craft?
Michael Tucker (34:38):
I think in general I support that, or at
least support theself-reflection that that seems
to be evidence of.
It's really interesting becauseI remember listening to
interviews with him when exmachina came out and people were
sort of saying like, wow, thisis your first time directing.
(35:00):
This is amazing, all this stuff.
And the vibe and his responsesthat I got was essentially like
yeah, directing is not that hard.
Like we put too much emphasison directing, like writing is
the more challenging thing.
Like we put too much emphasison directing, like writing is
the more challenging thing.
And so it's interesting to hearhim start from that place of
like yeah, directing isn't a bigdeal, to now saying I'm gonna
(35:22):
step back from directing alittle bit and so we can only
you know, guess as to what thatjourney was, but I think it's
maybe.
I'd be curious to hear him talkfurther about that and how he
has felt about directing nowthat he's done it a bunch of
times.
Like how has that changed hisperception of what directing
(35:43):
entails and how that might alsochange how he writes things in
the future.
Like I think that's to see acreator go on that arc.
I think means that there'ssomething interesting to mine
from their experience, and Iwish I could do that because I'm
very curious.
Taylor D. Adams (36:00):
I'm actually.
I find it kind of similar towhat you were talking about
earlier, where you, earlier onyour career, you're making a
bunch of stuff and the feedbackyou were getting was on the
writing.
And so then it finally clickedto.
You're like, oh, I will nowfocus on the writing.
And so then, if I like click toyou, you're like, oh, I will
now focus on the writing.
So I wonder if it's somethinglike that where there's
something within his career oreven feedback he's getting and
that's like hey, like maybe weneed to work on this thing over
(36:22):
here and then we can come backto this thing over here.
So it could be something likethat Maybe.
Michael Tucker (36:27):
Yeah, maybe I feel like like directing is so
hard and you have to wear a lotof hats and bring a lot of
skills to the table, and I'vebeen noticing there's, I think,
more like directing duos thathave been coming out over the
past, you know, 10, 15 years,and I'm curious if that trend
(36:48):
will continue, cause I think insome ways it's a disservice to
film to expect a single personto be great at all of the things
that are required for directing, and so I think someone like
Alex Garland there's clearly alot of things that he's really
really great at what, if youpaired that with the right
(37:09):
person?
Is that kind of alchemy that,back and forth, does that solve
problems or unlock new things?
And I feel that way about a lotof directors like now that I
wish I could.
You know you're really good atthis thing and I think you're a
little too set in your ways onthat.
So I want you to just pair upwith someone that's going to
shake you loose a little bit,cause I think that spontaneity
(37:31):
might I don't bring somecreativity and excitement back
to it was there a similar kindof alchemy, as you said, when
you and alex skyers startedworking together?
yeah, I think so it this is also.
This is one of the reasons why Ithink about it a lot is because
I've personally gone on thisjourney of being like a solo.
I am an auteur, I'm going tomake a michael tucker film to
(37:54):
really enjoying directing as acollaboration with alex, but I
also understand how difficult itis because we had to go on that
journey and even as, like closefriends, there's a lot of
competition, there's insecurity,there's a you, a desire to
preserve the thing that you love, and so you can be really
(38:16):
defensive about a style or acamera shot, a period in your
script, like whatever it is like.
There there's an opportunity fora lot of conflict and it takes
a lot of vulnerability and trustto truly collaborate with
someone.
But having gotten to the otherside of that, I am seeing all
(38:38):
the great things that come withit, and so I'm hoping that
that's a thing that more peopledo and and a journey that more
people go on, because I feellike that collaboration and
communication is what helps youmake something you couldn't make
by yourself, that neitherperson could.
It's something new that isbeing spawned into the universe
(38:58):
that doesn't that can still feellike it comes from an author,
but it doesn't have to be aperson, if that makes sense yeah
, that totally makes sense.
Taylor D. Adams (39:06):
I mean, that's one of the reasons why I love,
you know, filmmaking in generaltoo, is just that collaboration,
like I feel like working in anartistic space as like one
individual solo, like it's justnot as rewarding, you know, yeah
, um, so I'm gonna quote one ofyour, one of your, uh, one of
your videos here uh, talkingabout ex machina.
(39:28):
So ex machina treats theaudience like intelligent human
beings, encouraging us toparticipate in the story instead
of turning our brains off.
I believe this is what everyfilm should strive for With that
statement.
Do you think that that is whyyou have such a passion for
video games?
Michael Tucker (39:47):
Yes, Hmm, that's interesting.
I kind of thought about thatangle of it, but I think, yeah,
there's probably something there.
I think there's one of thethings that's so fun about video
games is that it's explicitlyparticipatory an avatar in this
(40:10):
world on this journey, and youare going through the motions,
you are doing the thing, and Ithink great movies can elicit a
similar psychology and headspaceof like I'm wrapped up in this
and I'm I might not beconsciously thinking, but my
brain is definitely taking inwhat I'm seeing and I'm trying
(40:31):
to figure out how I feel aboutthis person or this action.
What do I want to happen?
What am I afraid is going tohappen?
Like that, the kind of realitymelts away and you're just lost
in this.
You know space, where you are.
Yeah, I don't even know how todescribe it, but but whatever
that is, I feel like video gameskind of tap directly into that
(40:54):
and can use that to really greateffect, and so, yeah, I think
there's there's something there.
Taylor D. Adams (41:02):
Yeah, I was like I was rewatching all these,
just all this material and Iwas like that actually kind of
makes sense, like knowing thatyou're currently working at
Bioware, working on video games,like I can see the connection
beyond storytellingentertainment, like there's,
there seems to be more of aconnection there along like the,
like you said, participatoryroute.
This question is a little outthere, but how would you turn Ex
(41:25):
Machina into a video game?
Michael Tucker (41:28):
that's a really good challenge and question.
And so I was trying to thinkabout this and the where my
brain went was there's thisvideo game called her story.
I don't know if you've heard ofthat, but it's.
It's basically a.
It's like a collection ofinterviews with a woman and
(41:52):
they're like video recorded,like so it's actual videos and
you're.
It's essentially like you'rerole-playing like a police
detective and you have to try tofigure out did she commit this
crime or not, just by watchingthese kind of police interviews
with her on different days, andso you can try to track like oh,
oh, when did she say this thing?
(42:13):
But then she changed her storyover there and sort of.
You're kind of doing that, thatdetective work.
And there's lots of games thatare that kind of put you in that
mindset.
And I also really like rogue,like games where every time you
play it it's a little bitdifferent.
Hades I was obsessed with,where it's telling a story a
(42:35):
little bit different.
Hades, I was obsessed with,where it's telling a story.
But you know the the gameplayis kind of similar that you
always start in one place andyou progress through the levels
one by one, by one, and you getto the end, and then you either
die along the way and go back tothe start, or you get to the
end and then go back to thestart.
But every time you play it's alittle bit different.
The enemies are you, the enemypalette changes, the maps change
(42:55):
, and Hades is great at tellinga story also while doing that,
and so you're learning littlebits about the characters and
the relationship in the worldwhile that's happening.
And so, with all of that in myhead, I was thinking about what
I love about Ex Machina is thispuzzle of who do you trust?
So you're caleb and you'regoing into the space.
(43:17):
Do I trust nathan?
Do I trust ava?
Who's this robot?
Do I trust kyoko?
What is kyoko?
Is she in person?
Is she robot?
Like all those questions, and sosome kind of like simulator
roguelike where you're droppedinto the scenario and maybe
you're even a different playeron the board.
(43:37):
So like maybe sometimes you arethe nathan character and your
goal is to manipulate caleb andava and kyoko in order to, you
know, motivate ava, escape, andthat's like your goal.
But every time you play, theCaleb character is a different
personality and has differentwants or different needs, and
(44:02):
similarly, if you play as CalebNathan's, different this time,
interesting All those differentplayers on the board playing
through this game with a littlebit of randomization each time,
and your job is to somehowmanipulate everybody to get what
you want, never quite sure whois what, or you know that's.
(44:25):
That's what I love about thismovie is that dynamic, and I
think trying to recreate thatfeeling in a video game would be
really fun and challenging.
Taylor D. Adams (44:35):
Yeah, that sounds intense.
I've only played a coupleroguelike games and I don't like
them, but I might try thatbecause that sounds super
interesting, especially the gameyou mentioned, her Story.
I might check that out.
That sounds awesome.
Just because I love detectivestuff, I think that's a lot of
fun like puzzle solving.
So as many times as you watchthis movie, do you have a
(44:57):
favorite moment or scene from ExMachina?
Michael Tucker (45:01):
In some ways it's hard to choose, but in
other ways it's really easy.
I love the dancing scene.
Clip (45:06):
However, you would not be wasting your time if you were
dancing with her.
If you were dancing with her.
Taylor D. Adams (45:18):
I remember like that moment.
Do you know how to do it?
Have you watched it enough thatyou can?
Michael Tucker (45:21):
recreate it?
I don't think so.
There's like a cool, like elbowmove that they do at the end
that's kind of fun, oh yeah, butI remember being in the theater
and that kind of being themoment where I was like, oh,
this seals the deal, like thismovie has, has all these other
like cerebral and tension andthat kind of sinister vibe that
(45:43):
you were talking about, but alsohas space for a disco dance
scene.
That makes sense and it'srevealing character about like
Nathan and all the stuff, butit's also just silly and fun and
making me like laugh.
Uh.
So I really love that scene andI feel like it's another call
out of like there's no scene inannihilation that makes me laugh
(46:03):
.
Taylor D. Adams (46:04):
like I don't know that there's that many
scenes where people smile inannihilation I would be very
worried if there was somethingabout annihilation that made you
go like smile super wide Right.
Michael Tucker (46:14):
There's lots of things I love about annihilation
and devs et cetera, but it'sthat there's something about Ex
Machina that makes it the wholepackage.
For me that was missing fromsome of those other movies.
Taylor D. Adams (46:26):
Michael.
Thanks so much, man.
This has been a lot of fun totalk about this movie with you.
I really appreciate your time.
I really appreciate the podcastyou put out and I can't wait to
play whatever you're working onnext.
Michael Tucker (46:39):
I'm excited about that too, and yeah, thank
you for having me on.
This was fun.
I'm glad I got to revisit thismovie.
I'm glad I still love it and,yeah, it was a lot of fun
chatting about it with you.
Taylor D. Adams (46:52):
I love the idea of media being more than just
entertaining.
Sure, entertainment isimportant, and sometimes I do
want to shut my brain off at theend of the day for an hour or
two.
But when a movie or a TV showor even a piece of music asks us
, as the audience, to thinkabout and question what it has
to say, it's a richer and fullerexperience.
(47:14):
My job here on the Film Notespodcast is to ask questions and
hopefully those questions leadto an entertaining discussion
for you to listen to.
But more than that, my goal isto get you to get to know and
connect with my guests through ashared appreciation of what
they love.
It's my own attempt atcapturing that entertainment and
(47:36):
appreciation balance thatMichael is such a proponent of,
Because when we truly listen andthink about what we each have
to say, we create a deeperconnection to one another.
A massive amount of thanks toMichael for chatting with me
today and a thank you the sizeof Nathan's estate to you for
chatting with me today and athank you the size of Nathan's
estate to you for joining me.
(47:56):
If you want to take a look atsome of the podcasts and video
essays Michael has done with himand his team.
Please check out the links inthe show notes as well, and also
I have a downloadable copy ofthe ex Machina script for free.
Check it out If you want totake a look at what Michael has
been talking about in his videoessays and on this podcast.
If you enjoyed the show today,please, pretty, pretty please go
(48:18):
ahead and subscribe on yourfavorite podcast platform of
choice.
And if you happen to belistening on Apple podcasts,
please leave a rating review.
That helps us get in front ofmore awesome, awesome people
like yourself.
If you're really enjoying theshow and you want to help us
grow and get bigger and you know, shoot in cool places or
whatever please considerbecoming a patron of the show.
(48:40):
You can find some informationabout that in the show notes as
well, or you can visitpatreoncom slash film nuts.
There's some cool perks there.
Check it out.
Our theme this season is broughtto us by the deep end.
Our artwork is designed byModongo Sipikudi, and all
episodes of the Film Nutspodcast are produced and edited
by me, Taylor D Adams.
If you want to get in touch,you can email filmnutspodcast at
(49:04):
gmailcom or follow us on TikTokand Instagram at
filmnutspodcast, and don'tforget to join the Nuthouse
Discord community absolutelyfree by checking out the link in
the show notes as well.
It's a lot of fun.
We chat like every day and thenevery Monday we all watch a
movie together.
It's a blast.
You check it out.
But thank you again so much forjoining us today and until next
time.
Hey folks, just a quick heads up that all
episodes of the Film Nutspodcast contain heavy spoilers
and some strong language.
Nothing too crazy, but makesure there's no one with
sensitive ears too close by.
And if you like what you heartoday, please consider becoming
a patron of the show.
You can find links to that pagein the show notes or you can
visit patreoncom slash film nuts.
Okay, Anyway, please enjoy theshow and thank you so much for
(00:22):
listening.
Clip (00:24):
I'm sorry, I don't understand.
Michael Tucker (00:28):
You shouldn't trust him, you shouldn't trust
anything he says.
Clip (00:38):
Power restored.
Michael Tucker (00:39):
Ex Machina is one of those movies that, for
whatever reason, just likepresses all my buttons.
The cinematography and just thevibe of the movie I really like
.
Like it's sleek but kind ofwarm and fuzzy and around the
edges it's sexy, it's cool, it'sa little playful, it's a little
dangerous.
It has kind of all of thethings that I like to have in
(01:03):
movies in one big package.
Taylor D. Adams (01:08):
Hi, I'm Taylor and welcome back to the Film
Nuts podcast, a show about whywe love what we watch.
I am so excited for today'sepisode for two reasons.
It's with someone whose workI've followed and admired for a
long time, and our film today isrife for discussion both from
the technical and emotionalsides of filmmaking.
(01:31):
A gorgeously well-crafted moviethat asks the audience
thought-provoking questions likewhat is consciousness?
Does the act of creation makeus gods and are robots hot?
I'm talking about 2014's ExMachina.
Written and directed by AlexGarland, this moody and cerebral
sci-fi story is both a filmdesigned to entertain as well as
(01:55):
make us, as the audience,active participants, at least
according to my guest today.
Michael Tucker is the creator ofthe YouTube channel Lessons
from the Screenplay and host ofthe podcast Beyond the
Screenplay both projects thatbreak down writing in film,
television and even video games.
And in addition to thesestory-focused projects, michael
(02:15):
is also a narrative designer inthe gaming industry.
So he's, you know, gotcredentials.
Michael and I chat about whatit's like being a techno
optimist what role AI could playfor those processing grief, and
could Ex Machina be turned intoa video game.
So let's tear up the dancefloor.
Here's Michael Tucker talkingabout Ex Machina on the Film
(02:37):
Nuts podcast.
Michael Tucker (02:40):
I'm in a new house.
It's very exciting.
It's hard to become a homeownerright now, especially in
California, especially in LA.
So I feel very lucky to havefound a house and I'm learning
very quickly all the things thatgo along with buying and
maintaining a house, likeinspections and contractors.
And you think you are going toget the dishwasher installed,
(03:02):
but then it needs an electricianand then it needs this other
thing.
Taylor D. Adams (03:10):
So it's crazy, but great Also.
At the same time, have youfallen through the ceiling?
Yet I have not fallen throughthe ceiling.
Okay, um, my second day in myhouse, I fell through the
ceiling.
Clip (03:17):
Uh.
Taylor D. Adams (03:19):
I misstepped in the attic and made a Taylor
shaped hole in the ceiling.
Clip (03:23):
It was perfect Uh and I was like well.
Taylor D. Adams (03:26):
I was mad and I was like, well, let's just get
it out of the way and then maybefrom there things will get
better, and now you have a greatstory about it.
Michael Tucker (03:34):
Yes exactly, exactly.
Taylor D. Adams (03:36):
Um, so yeah, like tell me all right.
So, first of all, I've beenfollowing your work both from
lessons from the screenplay andbeyond screenplay for years now.
I think it's really cool thatwe're having this conversation.
Um, but give me kind of I knowthis is going to kind of a
throwback and maybe you've beenasked this question multiple
times but give me kind of theimpetus as to why you started
(03:59):
these kind of uh, the this typeof content, deep diving into how
films are made and,specifically, how they're
written.
Michael Tucker (04:07):
Yeah, the sort of shortest version of it is.
I've always wanted to be afilmmaker.
Since I was a kid I wanted towrite and direct, but mostly I
was focusing on the directingaspect.
And so, making movies in highschool and even college, I was
mostly thinking about directionand cool camera angles and all
(04:29):
the kind of fun, visible partsof filmmaking.
And so when I moved to LA andstarted to do, you know, some
shorts and commercials and wedid a web series and started to
get it in front of industrypeople, a lot of the feedback
was along the lines of thedirection is good and like
(04:50):
clever ideas are here, but thewriting isn't there.
And so I had to hear thatmultiple, multiple times until
finally it got through and I waslike, oh, I never actually paid
attention to what makes writinggood, so my writing isn't good.
Maybe I should do that if Iwant my writing to be good.
And so that realization camearound the same time that video
(05:13):
essays were a very big thing,every painting, obviously nerd
writer, et cetera.
And so I just kind of had thisidea of like, well, I want to
read a bunch of screenplays tolearn all the writing things and
maybe I can do a blog where Isummarize my findings.
And as soon as I startedwriting my first blog post, I
was like, oh no, this should bea video essay that will help
(05:36):
other people get it and force meto internalize this, because in
order to teach it, you have tounderstand it better.
Internalize this, because inorder to teach it, you have to
understand it better.
And so that was kind of theimpetus for starting.
Lessons from screenplay is likehere's a way to force myself to
read and analyze movies indepth, learn these lessons and
then share it with people.
(05:58):
And luckily it all kind of tookoff and was enough to become my
full-time job for several years.
So, uh, yeah.
So that was kind of thebeginning of the channel.
And then, a couple years intothat, as I was building out the
team, I'd met a bunch of reallycool also, uh, people that were
into film analysis and nerdslike me.
They were helping write andedit the videos for the channel
(06:20):
and we were like we like talkingabout movies, let's do a
podcast.
And it was like, well, yeah,but everyone says that.
But it was like, but maybe thiscould be like you know.
So we went for it and thenthat's been super fun, and so
we've been doing that ever sincetoo.
So that's kind of the at themain thrust of the channels.
Taylor D. Adams (06:39):
That's awesome and okay, I I don't know if I'm
making this up or if I'm right,but was the first video essay on
Ex Machina.
Michael Tucker (06:47):
It wasn't, but it was an early one.
So Gone Girl was the very firstvideo.
That's right.
Ex Machina was like 11.
For some reason that numberlike sticks out to me.
I hope I'm right about that,but yeah, it was a very early
video.
Taylor D. Adams (07:02):
I mean you made so many.
It's totally fine if we don'tremember the older things.
I could have sworn for somereason.
But yeah, gone Girl, that was agreat one too.
But that ruins my segue.
Michael Tucker (07:16):
But my segue is so why did you want to talk
about Ex Machina?
Ex Machina is one of thosemovies that, for whatever reason
, just like presses all mybuttons, like it just hits all
of the sweet spots for me whereit's this contained thriller
with just a few characters.
I love how simple the narrativeis and it's all about trust and
(07:38):
this kind of cat and mouse gameof you know who's good, who's
bad, who's a robot, who's not arobot.
Like there's all thesequestions and you're leaning's
good, who's bad, who's a robot,who's not a robot.
Like there's all thesequestions and you're leaning
forward and it's just like acouple people in this one
location are you building an ai?
Clip (07:53):
I've already built one and over the next few days you're
going to be the human componentin the turing test.
Holy shit, yeah, that's right,caleb, you got it, because if
that test is passed, you aredead center of the greatest
scientific event in the historyof man.
If you've created a consciousmachine, it's not the history of
(08:16):
man, that's the history of gods.
Michael Tucker (08:20):
And it's sci-fi.
I'm a sci-fi nerd, so there'slike those elements there and
the cinematography and just thevibe of the movie I really like,
like it's sleek but kind ofwarm and fuzzy and around the
edges it's like it's sexy, it'scool, it's a little playful,
it's a little dangerous, like itjust it has kind of all of the
(08:44):
things that I like to have inmovies and one big package, and
so I just immediately loved itwhen I saw it the first time.
Taylor D. Adams (08:52):
I think, I think the, as you were kind of
going through the contrastingfeelings of it I immediately
thought of like cozy andsinister at the same time.
Like that's kind of what itfeels like watching this.
At the same time, like that'skind of what it feels like
watching this.
Um, so you have a video essayabout this movie.
You've seen it multiple times.
You have a podcast episodeabout this movie.
This is one of your favoritemovies of the 2010s.
(09:12):
I assume you've seen it morethan once.
So with each, like, what wasyour reaction the first time you
saw it?
Do you remember?
Like, who were you with?
Who was Michael Tucker?
Like what was going on?
Michael Tucker (09:27):
who were you with?
Who was michael tucker, likewhat was going on?
Yeah, so I do remember.
Uh, I saw it with alex cayeros,one of our co-hosts at beyond
the screenplay and who helpsit's basically like my creative
partner and all thingsfilmmaking, um and I didn't know
much about the movie.
He, I think, was the one thatwas like it's this new a24 movie
, it's gonna be cool, let's justgo see it.
And I was like okay, and so Iwent in pretty much blind and
was pretty immediately swept upin it and just the whole time
(09:52):
was waiting for it to be bad andit kept not being bad and just
like kept being like more thingsthat I wanted and so by the end
, I was like that was amazing,like I really enjoyed that
experience.
I was not expecting that and,yeah, I feel like it was coming
at a time when sort of my, mytastes were evolving.
(10:13):
I've talked a lot about likebeing a big fincher fan and I
think around this time was whenI was starting to be like
appetite, like fincher has likemaybe too many control issues,
like things in fincher world area little bit too tight and a
little too perfect, and I feellike this movie feels like that,
but softened a little bit.
(10:34):
So the the filmmaking, the shotsare still precise and there's
intention behind it, but it'salso a little bit more loose and
organic and so, yeah, tastewise, it just felt like, oh,
this is like the new thing thatI want to pursue.
So, yeah, first time I wassuper, super into it and, yes,
(10:55):
as you said, I've seen it manytimes since then and, in making
the video essay, watched it overand over again and read the
screenplay, analyzed it, buthaven't really watched it start
to finish for, and read thescreenplay, analyzed it, uh, but
haven't really watched it startto finish for a couple years
now, and so part of why I wantedto talk about it was to force
myself to revisit it now, startto finish, and kind of see what
(11:17):
was different and what myreactions would be to it after
all this time.
Taylor D. Adams (11:24):
So what are your reactions to it after
seeing it for the millionth time, or whatever?
Michael Tucker (11:29):
Yeah, I still really really like it.
It's interesting.
I feel like there's kind ofbeen this arc with it of like it
was great and then maybe peoplewere poking at it and like,
even in our podcast episode thatwe recorded for beyond the
screenplay, I didn't feel likewe really got to have a full
(11:49):
conversation about it.
Like we sort of touched on acertain couple of issues but
landed in some conclusions aboutlike caleb and what the movie
was saying, that I like wasn'tquite sure that I agreed with
100%, and so watching it again,I kind of still have the same
feelings of like I think there'slots of room for interpretation
(12:13):
of a lot of things, and that'sone of the things I like about
the movie.
And, rather than concluding,this is what it's saying, or
that's what it's saying I'marriving at.
I think it's just putting someof these ideas out there for us
to react to as an audience.
The other thing I was curiousabout is our relationship with
AI is so different than it wasnine years ago when it came out,
(12:36):
and so now we have chat, gptand cloud and all these kind of
LLMs where you can interact withan AI as if it were a person,
and so I was wondering how itwould feel visiting a movie
about AI from nine years ago andin some ways it felt a little
dated, even because I think theperception of what AI can be and
(13:00):
how it can behave before thesekind of chat models was this
kind of more clinical, quiet,like I speak a little precisely
and I move like this because I'ma robot and I think our
relationship with AI is shakingthat up and going to continue
shaking that up.
So it felt old in some ways,but I still really enjoyed the
(13:24):
experience, still really lovethe performances.
Especially Oscar Isaac is sogreat in this cinematography.
All the things I loved about itI still love about it.
Taylor D. Adams (13:43):
I think that's really cool, that I mean this
this movie happens to be abouttechnology and the fact that
since it's came out, liketechnology has just evolved
exponentially.
Like not a lot of movies areabout something that ages as
like time goes on.
Some things are just about likea fixed moment, kind of history
.
Um, so, with your kind ofreflection on it now is there,
is there a part of you that haschanged, I guess, from the first
time you saw this, from thefirst time you saw this.
Michael Tucker (14:05):
Yes, I can't quite put a finger on what it is
, though I think I'm a.
I remember watching it thefirst time and kind of being
seduced along with Caleb.
Are you attracted to me?
What Are you attracted to me?
You give me indications thatyou are.
Clip (14:26):
I do yes.
How Micro-expressions.
Michael Tucke (14:30):
Micro-expressions the way your eyes fix on my
eyes and lips the way you holdmy gaze, or don't do you think
(14:52):
about me when we aren't together, like going on this journey of
like oh, that's a robot, I don'treally care about that robot,
and then by the end being likeI'm in love with ava, like yes,
we gotta like rescue her notquite that two dimensional, but
but essentially that and I feellike there was.
I have more distance from thatnow and part of that is just
(15:13):
seeing this movie so many times.
But also, I think just beingolder that's something I've
experienced when revisiting lotsof movies is like seeing them,
seeing a movie at different ages.
You relate to differentcharacters because you're sort
of, you know, in different lifephases and that kind of thing.
And so I felt less swept up inCaleb's psychology this time and
(15:40):
less vulnerable to that andmore intrigued by, I guess, the
greater, bigger questions thatmaybe, like Nathan was even
struggling with of, like thecreation of a new life form.
Does Nathan know that if hesucceeds it's going to mean that
he's dying right Like?
Does he know he's like rushingtoward his own demise?
(16:03):
Does he know he's like rushingtoward his own demise?
Like those kind of weightierquestions.
I think I was more intriguedand involved with this time than
the first time I watched it.
Clip (16:12):
Ava was a rat in a maze and I gave her one way out To
escape she'd have to useself-awareness, imagination,
manipulation, sexuality, empathy, and she did.
Now, if that isn't true, ai,what the fuck is?
So my only function was to besomeone she could use to escape.
Yeah, and you didn't select mebecause I'm good at coding.
(16:37):
No, well, no, I mean, you'reokay, you're even pretty good.
You selected me based on mysearch engine inputs.
Taylor D. Adams (16:47):
You obviously have an invested interest in
this movie, as we've said.
You've talked a lot about it ona lot of different platforms,
seen it multiple times.
Why do you think that this filmis so ripe for discussion?
Michael Tucker (17:05):
I mean, there's so much going on in it, but what
do you think about?
It lends to so many revisitsand discussions after the
revisits.
I think it's hits this kind ofperfect in between of it's vague
enough that you can wonder andask questions like it doesn't
quite answer everything, in alike wrapping it up with like a
little bow in terms of like whatthis meant or what this
person's intention really was.
So there's room for people todiscuss.
(17:27):
Well, I think ava was doingthis because of this reason, or
I think ava really did love himor whatever.
So I think there's there'senough room there for people to
kind of project themselves intoit and take you know, have
different takes.
I think the, the filmmaking, isalso just really interesting.
(17:48):
Like I, one of the reasons itwas fun to make a video about
this movie was the.
The differences between thescreenplay and the like final
product were, um, there weren'ta ton of them, but they were
notable differences and so therewas a lot, I think, kind of
(18:09):
found in the editing of themovie and I feel like there are
even these kind of montages thatI I get the sense were created
in the edit to kind of solvesome problems and fill some
holes and sometimes that cancause problems and take people
out of it.
I feel like in this movie itactually gives you room to stop
(18:32):
and think about what's justhappened and I think that is
part of why, when the movie ends, I think a lot of people have
like ideas in their heads orthings they want to talk about,
because they've had time toreally like process and try to
come to a conclusion about whatthey think was going on.
So I think it's this rightblend of vague and specific uh
(18:56):
that I don't know engenders uh,generates conversation and makes
people want to explore it moreuh, do you think you could ever
be tricked or seduced by AI?
So I don't think so, especiallynot 38 year old Michael, maybe
younger Michael, the one thatsaw this for the first time,
(19:17):
maybe you know I was thinkingabout this question because I
think it really depends on thesituation.
Where the situation in themovie, it's very clear that this
thing is a robot.
I think there is a reason thatyou would.
It'd be easy to remind yourselfthat you're being manipulated.
(19:41):
You're being manipulated ifsomeone were to create an exact
replica of a loved one of mine,such that I couldn't tell the
difference, or they just had thesame mannerisms and affect as
someone that I already caredabout.
That, I think, is where thevulnerability would come in,
because there's just you knowit's a replica of someone.
(20:02):
There's my mom as a robot form.
I think they're gonna shoot herin the head.
I don't know if it's really heror not, even if I know it's a
robot.
If it looks and acts just likemy mom, I'm gonna like.
There's an emotional reactionthat you just as a like a base
reptilian animal reaction, and Ithink that's one of the things
(20:23):
I find so fascinating in thismovie is that it's it's getting
at like there are certain justprimal things that we have as
humans that can be manipulated.
And so what happens when wemake something that can tap
directly into those primalthings and and our programming
essentially and use it againstus?
Clip (20:42):
Yeah.
Taylor D. Adams (20:43):
That's funny.
That reminds me of anotherDomino Gleason thing, the black
mirror episode, where he is aphysical AI recreation of his
actual self.
This is kind of weird, but ifthe technology ever advanced
like that and, god forbid,something happens Michael
Tucker's no longer with us Wouldyou be okay with your loved
(21:04):
ones resurrecting you as an AIbeing?
Michael Tucker (21:09):
um, that is a good question.
I think my immediate responseis if it helps them be happy, I
want them to do whatever theyneed to do to be happy.
Uh, I won't be around, sopeople can do whatever they want
.
I would never want to do thatto replace a loved one.
(21:31):
Um, but, yeah, I was thinkingabout that black mirror episode,
also, watching it this time,yeah, yeah, just realizing, yeah
, there are a lot ofsimilarities there and how
disturbing.
But also you can see, like, theappeal of, like you know, it
gets into questions of, likewhat even is a relationship and
(21:53):
what is consciousness, and howdo you know, you know, if you
could never tell the differencethat the person you were talking
to was a robot or not.
Does it matter?
Like all those, like thosequestions that spawn off I love
to think about and nerd outabout.
I have been playing around withAI and lots of different things
(22:14):
that I've been working on.
So, like, if I'm writingsomething or brainstorming
something using these you know,the chat, gpt models and cloud
and all these different things,mid journey, etc.
Like I've, I'm someone who'ssort of a techno optimist and
always curious about the newthing and like how can you use
it as a tool, and since so manyof these new AI tools seemed
(22:39):
geared toward creativity in away, that's, I think, unexpected
, I was very curious to playaround with it, and so I have
played around a lot with thosethings and I've had varying
levels of success with it.
And I'm happy that I haveplayed around a lot with those
things and I've had varyinglevels of success with it, and
I'm happy that I've playedaround with it, because I think
(22:59):
I'm not scared of it in a waythat you know, people that don't
understand, like, what'shappening under the hood or
haven't, like, really tested thelimitations of them, I think
there can be a fear around them,but occasionally I have used
LLM AI models to spur creativeideas, not really to create them
(23:20):
, but almost just like.
In some ways I've thought aboutit as like when Alex and I my
creative partner arebrainstorming ideas.
Sometimes you just need to saysomething out loud to someone
and have them say something backat you and even if nothing they
say actually moves on to thenext round of brainstorming,
(23:41):
just that interfacing andinteraction can trigger new
ideas for you, and so the mostsuccessful things I think I've
had with ai are moments whereit's kind of doing that a little
bit.
Um, so yeah, but I'm it's weird.
The relationship that I have hadwith ai stuff has started with
(24:03):
excitement and like what's thisgoing to do?
This is going to unlockeverything, and then diving in
more and realizing, well,there's still a lot of
limitations and it can't reallydo all the things that we maybe
thought it could do.
And really the the harder workof being creative like you don't
want to replace that, likethat's, that's the part that the
(24:25):
human needs to do to makesomething, and so it's kind of
changed the way I look at them.
Can we use them to geteverything else out of the way
so that I can do the hard partof being creative and being
alone and brainstorming?
Um, yeah, so that's my kind ofgeneral spiel about AI.
Taylor D. Adams (24:45):
Yeah, I think, um, I've been using it.
Or just AI tools as more like.
Yeah, like you said, likesounding boards, basically, like
I have this thought, I don'tknow what it is.
Throw it in some kind of AImodel, see what spits back out,
and I'll either go, oh, that'sinteresting or no, that's awful.
I will not, I will then.
Then it triggers another ideathat ends up being even better.
(25:08):
So I totally get that.
So sorry for the interruption,but I will be brief.
I am so grateful that youdecided to listen to the Film
Nuts podcast today.
If you are enjoying what you'rehearing, please consider
supporting the show on Patreon.
With a small monthly amount,you can get access to behind the
scenes goodies, early access tofull episodes and you can vote
on what movie we watch the firstMonday of every month on the
Nuthouse Discord.
(25:29):
The Nuthouse itself is free tojoin and is full of other film
and TV lovers, so you'll fitright in.
You can check out info on allthese things in the show notes,
and if all of this sounds like abit too much, that's totally OK
.
But if you want to keep up todate on all our episodes, please
be sure and subscribe on yourfavorite platform of choice and
if you're listening on Applepodcast, go ahead and leave a
rating review so we can get infront of other awesome people
(25:51):
like yourself.
Ok, enough of me rambling Backto the good stuff.
So, with a lot of your creatorwork being about the written
word, like the literalscreenplay of this movie as well
as many others, and even onyour podcast, you have like a
lesson that you have from eachmovie that you all watch.
Is there something that youreally appreciate about how ex
(26:16):
machina is written?
Michael Tucker (26:18):
yeah, absolutely , I think it's.
I love how efficient and simplethe narrative is, the and I was
mentioning you know earlierthat some of that was found in
the editing and so I talk aboutthis in my video.
But the opening scene of ExMachina, you know we start on
(26:40):
Caleb.
He wins this prize, we know he'sgoing somewhere within two
minutes, we know the basic setupfor everything and he's on the
helicopter off to wherever he'sgoing, and so I love how just
efficient that inciting incidentis, like it doesn't waste any
time, it just gets us going sowe know generally where we're
going.
But we have all these questionsnow set up that we want
(27:02):
answered.
This movie is really greatabout asking questions and
implanting questions in theaudience's mind, and then that
helicopter scene in the scriptwas a very long scene of like
lots of exposition and the movie.
They just keep two lines ofdialogue yeah, I was gonna say
that scene lasted five seconds,I thought right, yeah, and I
(27:25):
think that's uh, yeah, that'sone of the things that I
appreciated when analyzing thevideo to when analyzing the
movie to make the video wasseeing those changes from script
to screen, that the scriptalready being efficient, but
then also seeing thosedifferences.
Um, I think that's a good way toto learn is compare and
(27:47):
contrast what the creatorthought was going to work and
then what actually ended upworking, what was changed, and
in that instance it was like aless is more, explaining too
much about like I won this prize.
I'm going to be staying herefor a week.
I don't know anything aboutthis print.
Like we don't need that laundrylist of things like less is
(28:08):
more.
That creates questions in ourin our head, um, um and yeah.
So I just love.
I love to study this movie forthose reasons, and there's also
a really cool edit change wherethere's a scene in the movie
where caleb uh, where nathanshows caleb how he designed ava
(28:30):
and sort of gives them like aquick tour of the lab here we
have her mind Structured gel.
Clip (28:40):
I had to get away from circuitry.
I needed something that couldarrange and rearrange on a
molecular level to keep its formwhen required.
Holding for memories, shiftingfor thoughts this is her
hardware wetware.
Michael Tucker (28:57):
That comes in a different place in the script.
I think it comes a little bitearlier and as part of kind of
the more of the onboarding partof the sequence right it's like
welcome, caleb, here's whatyou're gonna be doing like an
exposition dump pretty much yeah, yeah, and they moved it to be
(29:20):
after one of the ava sessions ina way that I think is really
smart because of you know thekind of with every ava session,
caleb's getting more and morepulled into you know, his kind
of uh, you know desire for her,you know swept obsession,
whatever you want to call it,and so they put that scene after
(29:41):
one of those, and so it createsthis kind of juxtaposition
where caleb is like gettingswept up and they're like, oh my
god, this is a person.
And then juxtaposed with a likehere's why she's not a person,
here's her brain, here's themechanical parts, and so I think
it just adds a a nice contrastand dynamic to Caleb's arc, to
(30:01):
kind of make it be a little bitmore going back and forth
between do I believe this is aperson?
Taylor D. Adams (30:08):
No, no, it can't be a person, but maybe I
do believe this is a person, andso I think having that dynamic
keeps it interesting andprevents it from just being like
a linear one, two, three, four,five kind of thing.
Yeah, I think, now that youmentioned it, that switch of the
explanation of like what ava'sbrain is I think also for the
audience, it gets us invested asto why we should care about the
(30:32):
science behind it, like we seeAva and get to know her as a
character, and then that we havethe explanation as to like why
she's different, which I thinkis pretty cool, cause, yeah,
like everyone's first instinctwhen they write a screenplay is
like to go like linear.
I remember in college videoproduction class, like everybody
had their own like assignmentand we were did like
(30:52):
storyboarding presentationsEvery single person's video
storyboard.
The first story shot of astoryboard was an alarm clock.
Like there were 12 people it'samazing and every single person
started with an alarm clock andafter the fourth one I was like,
oh, I think we're supposed torealize that we're doing this.
Let's try to switch things up.
(31:14):
So I think that's super justrefreshing when things kind of
like mix up the chronologywithout actually mixing up the
timeline.
I think it's pretty impossible.
Yeah, yeah, a hundred percent.
So this was Alex Garland's firstmovie that he both wrote and
directed Um.
Since then he's done four otherprojects, including a TV series
, Looking back at Ex Machina.
Michael Tucker (31:42):
Can you possibly sense kind of the trajectory
that he's gone on with hisprojects?
I think it's one of thosethings where in the moment when
it, when Ex Machina came out, itwas like there's multiple paths
forward that reality could take.
And now I'm kind of using likedevs language it's fitting.
It's fitting for thisconversation where it's like, oh
(32:02):
, this is like a new director.
This movie felt so intentionaland like, well rendered and the
storytelling is really great.
Was this an accident or is thisa new person that has this high
level of mastery that's goingto go on to make amazing things?
And I feel like that's oftenthe case when a new director
(32:24):
makes a movie and it's reallygreat.
It's like, is this going to bea pattern or is this a one-off?
And I think what's beeninteresting about Alex Garland's
directorial career is thatevery topic that he's made a
movie or series about I findreally interesting and I'm
always excited about seeingsomeone tackle things like
(32:45):
determinism or you know, thiskind of weird self-destructive,
psychedelic tour of whatever youknow annihilation was, so it's.
It's been interesting seeingthat trend continue of like
these interesting kind ofchallenging, subversive topics
(33:09):
and ideas being explored.
In his work, the directing, alot of the things that I really
like about ex machina havepersisted, like good
cinematography, interestingcamera choices.
I feel like the the life andfun that was in ex machina has
(33:32):
been absent for me and devs inannihilation anyway, and I
actually haven't seen uh men orcivil war so, and I think that
kind of says they're not fun, Imean there's no level of fun.
Taylor D. Adams (33:49):
I mean, I haven't seen civil war yet, but
yeah, there's no level of fun inmen.
I'll tell you that, yeah, soyeah, there's no level of fun in
men.
Michael Tucker (33:54):
I'll tell you that yeah, so yeah it's.
I think it's interesting tothen go back and see the seeds
of what would continue like arethere in Ex Machina.
Taylor D. Adams (34:11):
But I think that a lot of the things that
make this movie special andstand out to me, were not
brought along to some of some ofhis other work.
So yeah, alex Carlin recentlysaid that he's going to kind of
take a break from directing fora while for civil work kind of
focus a little bit more onwriting.
I mean, we can speculate allkinds of reasons, but do you,
what do you think about artistskind of voluntarily scaling back
(34:32):
responsibility in order to kindof like maybe focus on one
particular part of the craft?
Michael Tucker (34:38):
I think in general I support that, or at
least support theself-reflection that that seems
to be evidence of.
It's really interesting becauseI remember listening to
interviews with him when exmachina came out and people were
sort of saying like, wow, thisis your first time directing.
(35:00):
This is amazing, all this stuff.
And the vibe and his responsesthat I got was essentially like
yeah, directing is not that hard.
Like we put too much emphasison directing, like writing is
the more challenging thing.
Like we put too much emphasison directing, like writing is
the more challenging thing.
And so it's interesting to hearhim start from that place of
like yeah, directing isn't a bigdeal, to now saying I'm gonna
(35:22):
step back from directing alittle bit and so we can only
you know, guess as to what thatjourney was, but I think it's
maybe.
I'd be curious to hear him talkfurther about that and how he
has felt about directing nowthat he's done it a bunch of
times.
Like how has that changed hisperception of what directing
(35:43):
entails and how that might alsochange how he writes things in
the future.
Like I think that's to see acreator go on that arc.
I think means that there'ssomething interesting to mine
from their experience, and Iwish I could do that because I'm
very curious.
Taylor D. Adams (36:00):
I'm actually.
I find it kind of similar towhat you were talking about
earlier, where you, earlier onyour career, you're making a
bunch of stuff and the feedbackyou were getting was on the
writing.
And so then it finally clickedto.
You're like, oh, I will nowfocus on the writing.
And so then, if I like click toyou, you're like, oh, I will
now focus on the writing.
So I wonder if it's somethinglike that where there's
something within his career oreven feedback he's getting and
that's like hey, like maybe weneed to work on this thing over
(36:22):
here and then we can come backto this thing over here.
So it could be something likethat Maybe.
Michael Tucker (36:27):
Yeah, maybe I feel like like directing is so
hard and you have to wear a lotof hats and bring a lot of
skills to the table, and I'vebeen noticing there's, I think,
more like directing duos thathave been coming out over the
past, you know, 10, 15 years,and I'm curious if that trend
(36:48):
will continue, cause I think insome ways it's a disservice to
film to expect a single personto be great at all of the things
that are required for directing, and so I think someone like
Alex Garland there's clearly alot of things that he's really
really great at what, if youpaired that with the right
(37:09):
person?
Is that kind of alchemy that,back and forth, does that solve
problems or unlock new things?
And I feel that way about a lotof directors like now that I
wish I could.
You know you're really good atthis thing and I think you're a
little too set in your ways onthat.
So I want you to just pair upwith someone that's going to
shake you loose a little bit,cause I think that spontaneity
(37:31):
might I don't bring somecreativity and excitement back
to it was there a similar kindof alchemy, as you said, when
you and alex skyers startedworking together?
yeah, I think so it this is also.
This is one of the reasons why Ithink about it a lot is because
I've personally gone on thisjourney of being like a solo.
I am an auteur, I'm going tomake a michael tucker film to
(37:54):
really enjoying directing as acollaboration with alex, but I
also understand how difficult itis because we had to go on that
journey and even as, like closefriends, there's a lot of
competition, there's insecurity,there's a you, a desire to
preserve the thing that you love, and so you can be really
(38:16):
defensive about a style or acamera shot, a period in your
script, like whatever it is like.
There there's an opportunity fora lot of conflict and it takes
a lot of vulnerability and trustto truly collaborate with
someone.
But having gotten to the otherside of that, I am seeing all
(38:38):
the great things that come withit, and so I'm hoping that
that's a thing that more peopledo and and a journey that more
people go on, because I feellike that collaboration and
communication is what helps youmake something you couldn't make
by yourself, that neitherperson could.
It's something new that isbeing spawned into the universe
(38:58):
that doesn't that can still feellike it comes from an author,
but it doesn't have to be aperson, if that makes sense yeah
, that totally makes sense.
Taylor D. Adams (39:06):
I mean, that's one of the reasons why I love,
you know, filmmaking in generaltoo, is just that collaboration,
like I feel like working in anartistic space as like one
individual solo, like it's justnot as rewarding, you know, yeah
, um, so I'm gonna quote one ofyour, one of your, uh, one of
your videos here uh, talkingabout ex machina.
(39:28):
So ex machina treats theaudience like intelligent human
beings, encouraging us toparticipate in the story instead
of turning our brains off.
I believe this is what everyfilm should strive for With that
statement.
Do you think that that is whyyou have such a passion for
video games?
Michael Tucker (39:47):
Yes, Hmm, that's interesting.
I kind of thought about thatangle of it, but I think, yeah,
there's probably something there.
I think there's one of thethings that's so fun about video
games is that it's explicitlyparticipatory an avatar in this
(40:10):
world on this journey, and youare going through the motions,
you are doing the thing, and Ithink great movies can elicit a
similar psychology and headspaceof like I'm wrapped up in this
and I'm I might not beconsciously thinking, but my
brain is definitely taking inwhat I'm seeing and I'm trying
(40:31):
to figure out how I feel aboutthis person or this action.
What do I want to happen?
What am I afraid is going tohappen?
Like that, the kind of realitymelts away and you're just lost
in this.
You know space, where you are.
Yeah, I don't even know how todescribe it, but but whatever
that is, I feel like video gameskind of tap directly into that
(40:54):
and can use that to really greateffect, and so, yeah, I think
there's there's something there.
Taylor D. Adams (41:02):
Yeah, I was like I was rewatching all these,
just all this material and Iwas like that actually kind of
makes sense, like knowing thatyou're currently working at
Bioware, working on video games,like I can see the connection
beyond storytellingentertainment, like there's,
there seems to be more of aconnection there along like the,
like you said, participatoryroute.
This question is a little outthere, but how would you turn Ex
(41:25):
Machina into a video game?
Michael Tucker (41:28):
that's a really good challenge and question.
And so I was trying to thinkabout this and the where my
brain went was there's thisvideo game called her story.
I don't know if you've heard ofthat, but it's.
It's basically a.
It's like a collection ofinterviews with a woman and
(41:52):
they're like video recorded,like so it's actual videos and
you're.
It's essentially like you'rerole-playing like a police
detective and you have to try tofigure out did she commit this
crime or not, just by watchingthese kind of police interviews
with her on different days, andso you can try to track like oh,
oh, when did she say this thing?
(42:13):
But then she changed her storyover there and sort of.
You're kind of doing that, thatdetective work.
And there's lots of games thatare that kind of put you in that
mindset.
And I also really like rogue,like games where every time you
play it it's a little bitdifferent.
Hades I was obsessed with,where it's telling a story a
(42:35):
little bit different.
Hades, I was obsessed with,where it's telling a story.
But you know the the gameplayis kind of similar that you
always start in one place andyou progress through the levels
one by one, by one, and you getto the end, and then you either
die along the way and go back tothe start, or you get to the
end and then go back to thestart.
But every time you play it's alittle bit different.
The enemies are you, the enemypalette changes, the maps change
(42:55):
, and Hades is great at tellinga story also while doing that,
and so you're learning littlebits about the characters and
the relationship in the worldwhile that's happening.
And so, with all of that in myhead, I was thinking about what
I love about Ex Machina is thispuzzle of who do you trust?
So you're caleb and you'regoing into the space.
(43:17):
Do I trust nathan?
Do I trust ava?
Who's this robot?
Do I trust kyoko?
What is kyoko?
Is she in person?
Is she robot?
Like all those questions, and sosome kind of like simulator
roguelike where you're droppedinto the scenario and maybe
you're even a different playeron the board.
(43:37):
So like maybe sometimes you arethe nathan character and your
goal is to manipulate caleb andava and kyoko in order to, you
know, motivate ava, escape, andthat's like your goal.
But every time you play, theCaleb character is a different
personality and has differentwants or different needs, and
(44:02):
similarly, if you play as CalebNathan's, different this time,
interesting All those differentplayers on the board playing
through this game with a littlebit of randomization each time,
and your job is to somehowmanipulate everybody to get what
you want, never quite sure whois what, or you know that's.
(44:25):
That's what I love about thismovie is that dynamic, and I
think trying to recreate thatfeeling in a video game would be
really fun and challenging.
Taylor D. Adams (44:35):
Yeah, that sounds intense.
I've only played a coupleroguelike games and I don't like
them, but I might try thatbecause that sounds super
interesting, especially the gameyou mentioned, her Story.
I might check that out.
That sounds awesome.
Just because I love detectivestuff, I think that's a lot of
fun like puzzle solving.
So as many times as you watchthis movie, do you have a
(44:57):
favorite moment or scene from ExMachina?
Michael Tucker (45:01):
In some ways it's hard to choose, but in
other ways it's really easy.
I love the dancing scene.
Clip (45:06):
However, you would not be wasting your time if you were
dancing with her.
If you were dancing with her.
Taylor D. Adams (45:18):
I remember like that moment.
Do you know how to do it?
Have you watched it enough thatyou can?
Michael Tucker (45:21):
recreate it?
I don't think so.
There's like a cool, like elbowmove that they do at the end
that's kind of fun, oh yeah, butI remember being in the theater
and that kind of being themoment where I was like, oh,
this seals the deal, like thismovie has, has all these other
like cerebral and tension andthat kind of sinister vibe that
(45:43):
you were talking about, but alsohas space for a disco dance
scene.
That makes sense and it'srevealing character about like
Nathan and all the stuff, butit's also just silly and fun and
making me like laugh.
Uh.
So I really love that scene andI feel like it's another call
out of like there's no scene inannihilation that makes me laugh
(46:03):
.
Taylor D. Adams (46:04):
like I don't know that there's that many
scenes where people smile inannihilation I would be very
worried if there was somethingabout annihilation that made you
go like smile super wide Right.
Michael Tucker (46:14):
There's lots of things I love about annihilation
and devs et cetera, but it'sthat there's something about Ex
Machina that makes it the wholepackage.
For me that was missing fromsome of those other movies.
Taylor D. Adams (46:26):
Michael.
Thanks so much, man.
This has been a lot of fun totalk about this movie with you.
I really appreciate your time.
I really appreciate the podcastyou put out and I can't wait to
play whatever you're working onnext.
Michael Tucker (46:39):
I'm excited about that too, and yeah, thank
you for having me on.
This was fun.
I'm glad I got to revisit thismovie.
I'm glad I still love it and,yeah, it was a lot of fun
chatting about it with you.
Taylor D. Adams (46:52):
I love the idea of media being more than just
entertaining.
Sure, entertainment isimportant, and sometimes I do
want to shut my brain off at theend of the day for an hour or
two.
But when a movie or a TV showor even a piece of music asks us
, as the audience, to thinkabout and question what it has
to say, it's a richer and fullerexperience.
(47:14):
My job here on the Film Notespodcast is to ask questions and
hopefully those questions leadto an entertaining discussion
for you to listen to.
But more than that, my goal isto get you to get to know and
connect with my guests through ashared appreciation of what
they love.
It's my own attempt atcapturing that entertainment and
(47:36):
appreciation balance thatMichael is such a proponent of,
Because when we truly listen andthink about what we each have
to say, we create a deeperconnection to one another.
A massive amount of thanks toMichael for chatting with me
today and a thank you the sizeof Nathan's estate to you for
chatting with me today and athank you the size of Nathan's
estate to you for joining me.
(47:56):
If you want to take a look atsome of the podcasts and video
essays Michael has done with himand his team.
Please check out the links inthe show notes as well, and also
I have a downloadable copy ofthe ex Machina script for free.
Check it out If you want totake a look at what Michael has
been talking about in his videoessays and on this podcast.
If you enjoyed the show today,please, pretty, pretty please go
(48:18):
ahead and subscribe on yourfavorite podcast platform of
choice.
And if you happen to belistening on Apple podcasts,
please leave a rating review.
That helps us get in front ofmore awesome, awesome people
like yourself.
If you're really enjoying theshow and you want to help us
grow and get bigger and you know, shoot in cool places or
whatever please considerbecoming a patron of the show.
(48:40):
You can find some informationabout that in the show notes as
well, or you can visitpatreoncom slash film nuts.
There's some cool perks there.
Check it out.
Our theme this season is broughtto us by the deep end.
Our artwork is designed byModongo Sipikudi, and all
episodes of the Film Nutspodcast are produced and edited
by me, Taylor D Adams.
If you want to get in touch,you can email filmnutspodcast at
(49:04):
gmailcom or follow us on TikTokand Instagram at
filmnutspodcast, and don'tforget to join the Nuthouse
Discord community absolutelyfree by checking out the link in
the show notes as well.
It's a lot of fun.
We chat like every day and thenevery Monday we all watch a
movie together.
It's a blast.
You check it out.
But thank you again so much forjoining us today and until next
time.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.