Critical response Anil Seth in magazine
New Scientist said in a multi-page review, "It is a rare thing to see a movie about science that takes no prisoners intellectually ... [it] is a stylish, spare and cerebral psycho-techno thriller, which gives a much needed shot in the arm for smart science fiction". The review suggested that the theme was whether "Ava makes a conscious person feel that the Ava is conscious". An AI commentator, Azeem, has noted that although the film seemed to be about a robot who wanted to be human, it was actually a pessimistic story along the lines of
Nick Bostrom's warning of how difficult it will be to successfully control a strategising artificial intelligence or know what it would do if free.
The New York Times critic
Manohla Dargis gave the film a 'Critic's Pick', calling it "a smart, sleek movie about men and the machines they make".
Kenneth Turan of the
Los Angeles Times recommended the film, stating: "Shrewdly imagined and persuasively made, 'Ex Machina' is a spooky piece of speculative fiction that's completely plausible, capable of both thinking big thoughts and providing pulp thrills."
Steven Rea,
The Philadelphia Inquirer film critic, gave the film four out of four, writing: "Like stage actors who live and breathe their roles over the course of months, Isaac, Gleeson, and Vikander excel, and cast a spell."
IGN reviewer Chris Tilly gave the film a nine out of ten 'Amazing' score, saying "Anchored by three dazzling central performances, it's a stunning directorial debut from Alex Garland that's essential viewing for anyone with even a passing interest in where technology is taking us." Mike Scott, writing for the
New Orleans Times-Picayune, said, "It's a theme
Mary Shelley brought us in
Frankenstein, which was first published in 1818... And while
Ex Machina replaces the stitches and neck bolts with gears and fiber-optics, it all feels an awful lot like the same story".
Jaime Perales Contreras, writing for
Letras Libres, compared
Ex Machina as a gothic experience similar to a modern version of
Frankenstein, saying "both the novel
Frankenstein and the movie
Ex Machina share the history of a fallible god in a continuous battle against his creation".
Ignatiy Vishnevetsky of
The A.V. Club criticised the way the science fiction, near the end, veered off course from being a "film of ideas" by "taking an arbitrary left turn into the territory of corny slasher thrillers": "While
Ex Machinas ending isn't unmotivated [...], it does fracture much of what's special about the movie. Up until the final scenes, Garland creates and sustains a credible atmosphere of unease and scientific speculation, defined by color-coded production design [...] and a tiny, capable cast". Steve Dalton from
The Hollywood Reporter stated, "The story ends in a muddled rush, leaving many unanswered questions. Like a newly launched high-end smartphone,
Ex Machina looks cool and sleek, but ultimately proves flimsy and underpowered. Still, for dystopian future-shock fans who can look beyond its basic design flaws, Garland's feature debut functions just fine as superior pulp sci-fi." The Writers Guild Foundation listed the screenplay as one of the best in 2010s film and television, with one writer singling out the scene in which Caleb and Nathan discuss the model after Ava as "a great illustration of getting your reader/audience to care about what happens next." In 2021, members of
Writers Guild of America West (WGAW) and
Writers Guild of America, East (WGAE) voted its screenplay 50th in WGA’s 101 Greatest Screenplays of the 21st Century (So Far). In
Science Fiction Film and Television, reviewer Nick Jones states, "Though it equates women with machines (as, in fact, did
Alan Turing's original test),
Ex Machina does so in order to critique this equation and how it has been fostered by the masculine culture Nathan and Caleb represent." Jones found the film an "intriguing counter-argument to
Steven Spielberg's
A.I. Artificial Intelligence despite similarities. In 2025, it was one of the films voted for the "Readers' Choice" edition of
The New York Times list of "The 100 Best Movies of the 21st Century," finishing at number 142.
Top ten lists Ex Machina was listed on many critics' top ten lists. • 1st – Andrew Barker,
Variety • 2nd – Bill Goodykoontz,
Arizona Republic • 3rd –
Christy Lemire,
RogerEbert.com • 3rd – Lindsey Bahr,
Associated Press • 3rd – Borys Kit,
The Hollywood Reporter • 4th – Mark Olsen,
Los Angeles Times • 5th –
Ann Hornaday,
The Washington Post • 5th – Adam Chitwood,
Collider.com • 5th –
Richard Lawson,
Vanity Fair • 6th – Drew McWeeney,
HitFix • 6th – Kate Erbland,
IndieWire • 6th – Chuck Wilson,
Village Voice • 7th – Ben Travers,
IndieWire • 7th – Marlow Stern,
The Daily Beast • 7th – Sara Stewart,
New York Post • 7th –
Alonso Duralde,
TheWrap • 8th – Jesse Hassenger,
A.V. Club • 8th – Alison Willmore,
BuzzFeed • 8th – Peter Rainer,
Christian Science Monitor • 9th – Matthew Jacobs,
Huffington Post • 10th – Matt Singer,
ScreenCrush • 10th –
Stephanie Zacharek,
Time Magazine • 10th –
Matt Zoller Seitz,
RogerEbert.com • Top 10 (listed alphabetically) –
Steven Rea,
Philadelphia Inquirer • Top 10 (listed alphabetically) –
Joe Morgenstern,
The Wall Street Journal Accolades At the
88th Academy Awards,
Ex Machina received a nomination for
Best Original Screenplay and won for
Best Visual Effects. The film's other nominations include five
British Academy Film Awards, three
Critics' Choice Movie Awards (winning one), and a
Golden Globe Award. ==See also==