ex_machina and Creative Control

Two films similar in content and in approach, both ex_machina(Garland 2015) and Creative Control(Dickinson 2015) are depictions of the technological advances in the near-to-distant future and how they affect the human condition. The films portray misconceptions that we as humans believe because of prior knowledge that indicates so. In the case with ex_machina, thinking or having a conscious is what makes us human, a theme touched upon in many films before this one, in particular, Blade Runner. However, ex_machina gets technical and analytical with this theme and delves into actual theoretical principles. Creative Control addresses the contradiction of the namesake in capitalist culture. 
ex_machina is quite the philosophical film addressing questions rather than demonizing technology or employing a simple sci-fi narrative. It even mentions the source of inspiration for the philosophical material in the name of Nathan's company BlueBook. This name stems from the actual Blue Book, notes of philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein. The main focus is the question of conscience or thinking and if that's a unique trait to humans because of our special cerebral capacities. Wittgenstein argues contrary to this belief stating that thinking is "essentially the activity of operating signs". Our minds are simply "agents" of thinking, the system that operates these signs and arranges them in order for the mind to reach a conclusion. In the case of Ava in the film, her software is the BlueBook search engine, therefore gaining signs from all over the world and operating them into a conscience. 
Creative Control addresses the harsh reality that there is practically no creative control in capitalist culture. Director Benjamin Dickinson stated in an interview after the screening at SXSW, "it's never the way you'd like it to be. There's always pain, there's always death. There's always negotiating with other people who don't agree with you. There's the dawning realization that maybe there's no ultimate truth, or at least there's not an ultimate truth that we can know. I mean, that's life". One cannot have true control over any action that big, whether it be artistic, or something as distant from that argument as farming. The irony of David's statement in the film on having complete creative control over the outcome of the Augmenta account, despite having entrusted it almost completely to Reggie Watts, is laughable. The same is shown in the Phalanex commercial sequence where the executives of the company are telling the ad agency what they want from the commercial, and then the ad executives tell the filmmakers what to do, and then the filmmakers tell the actor what to do. The chain of command is explicitly shown in that one-take sequence. It ends with David's expression of unsatisfaction, because he knows of his lack of creative control.