Colossus

A classic of science fiction and the paranoid political thrillers prevalent at the time: chilling in its implications and persuasively presented, the film makes for intelligent if demanding viewing. In hindsight, while it's much admired by connoisseurs of either genre (being a fan of both, I'd been longing to catch up with it for years!), the film deserves to have a more widespread reputation. Undoubtedly, this remains Joseph Sargent's best work; his cinematic career hasn't provided much else worthy of note, with the only film to come any close being the fine caper THE TAKING OF PELHAM ONE, TWO, THREE (1974).

Its computer-run-amok theme echoes the Hal 9000 of 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968) and looks forward to DEMON SEED (1977)'s Proteus IV; what a fascinating if overwhelming triple-bill the films would make! Where production values are concerned – polished look (courtesy of d.p. Gene Polito, who later shot WESTWORLD [1973]), imaginative settings (by the veteran Alexander Golitzen), often disorienting editing (the expert work of Folmar Blangsted) and an appropriately weird score (by Michel Colombier) – the film truly can't be faulted, but it also benefits from a largely anonymous cast. The abrupt and unresolved ending, with Man refusing to give in to the undeniable superior intellect of his creation, is highly effective and certainly left the audience with sufficient food for thought – and even apprehension – for the future.

Needless to say, when this was announced for DVD release, I was ready to leap at the chance of finally being able to own and watch the film – but, as many of you must already know, my joy (and that of many another fan, I'm sure) was short-lived when it emerged that Universal had issued a Pan-and-Scan version (which I can only imagine now how this ruined its detailed widescreen compositions)!; thankfully, I was able to make amends via the miraculous format called DivX...

It's interesting reading the comments of those who dislike this movie; they either call it "dated" and so disregard it, or "ludicrous" in that it could never happen; that way they don't have to take the concept seriously and so aren't threatened by it.

Well, History is dated. That's why it's history. And we learn history supposedly so that we won't repeat the mistakes of the past (I wonder if that's ever worked?).

Science Fiction, if done well, is like watching future history. Star Wars begins with "Long, Long Ago..." and yet the world it presented was thousands of years ahead of ours. Science Fiction's best use is often in producing cautionary tales so that "We Don't Go There", or at least make us think before we do. Yes, the idea of a computer taking over the world through control of nuclear technology is ludicrous; very ludicrous. Until it happens. Then it is already too late. That's the point of science fiction and other cautionary tales.

So Collosus is about a dated computer that becomes sentient and starts asserting ruthless control for what it sees as the "betterment of mankind". What does it matter if the technology is dated? Our technology will seem hopelessly dated 100 years from now. This movie is very much like Terry Gilliam's dark movie, "Brazil", in a strange way. Gilliam has said his movie was a cautionary tale, that the only escape from the world is in your imagination. Both movies make the same point: that if a certain process (government, or technological) is allowed to continue without safeguards, we will reach a point where there is no escape. The time of quaint tales of Robin Hood and other rebels has passed: No "rebel band" is going to stop it, no revolution is going to succeed, because the stranglehold granted by modern weapons is so pervasive we can't fight it without dying. So instead of relying on comicbook fantasies of "fighting the Power", we should make sure we never get to the point of no return. In this movie's case, the fatal error was trusting in technology to run itself, without understanding it or taking precautions to install safeguards of overriding its commands and shutting it down if necessary.

In our country, if our government suddenly decided to become a dictatorship, there would be no revolution or rebellion. Our little handguns and rifles aren't going to match cluster bombs, missiles and chemical weapons. We're at the mercy of our leaders, and the chance for rebellion by force in countries around the world (such as Zimbabwe) has past.

The cautionary tale that Collosus tells is very old, and considered dated and clichéd by many. And because of that, its lesson is lost on those too "clever" to learn from it. Let's hope these people too clever to learn from dated clichés don't come into positions governing things like Collosus.

"Colossus: The Forbin Project" integrates two familiar themes--a Cold War "Doomsday" scenario, and computers that run amok--to produce a truly engrossing thriller.

In a top-secret Pentagon project, American computer scientist Dr. Charles Forbin builds a great supercomputer, "Colossus," to control America's entire nuclear forces automatically. The Soviets soon follow with their own supercomputer, "Guardian," to control their own forces.

"Colossus" then stuns Forbin by issuing a "request" to set up communication with "Guardian," perhaps to learn more about it. And that's when Dr. Forbin makes his fatal mistake. His scientific curiosity and love for his "child" overwhelms him too, and he gets the President to approve the communication.

Colossus and Guardian begin communicating, soon exchanging data in a new language of their own devising that no human being can understand.

Fearing what may be happening, the U.S. and U.S.S.R. attempt to break the communication link. But Colossus and Guardian react by launching nuclear missiles at various targets to force the humans to keep the link open--and to do whatever else they command. It becomes clear that the two computers are now conspiring with each other--against the rest of humanity.

The rest of the movie is a fascinating battle of wits between the human designers of the machines, who must now try to find a way to defeat machines they had just spent ten years making invincible, and the Colossus-Guardian computers with their own rapidly developing plans for the future of humankind.

The moral of this movie makes an interesting contrast with the moral of "Forbidden Planet." "Forbidden Planet" showed that no matter how advanced our civilization gets technologically, we can't escape the "monsters" buried deeply in the baser instincts of our subconscious. "Colossus" showed that we can't escape hubris or "Murphy's Law" either.

Somewhat forgotten computer movie which has aired on AMC and more recently on the sci-fi channel. Don't view it by todays computer technology standards however. The basis of the story is still there and not all that dated. The United States develops a computer that will handle all it's nuclear missiles and eliminate the accident factor in triggering a nuclear war. The Soviets unbeknownst to the US of A have done the same. The two computers find each other join forces and.... well watch and see! Dr. Charles Forbin played well by Eric Braeden is the brainchild of the American version of this really big PC. Susan Clark is also cast as an attractive female Computer Geek and a little suggestive sex is tossed in for what appears to be GP. A pre Happy Days Marion Ross is included in the cast as one of Forbins assistants. Watch this film for the suspense thriller ala Twilight Zone type picture it is and forget about the antiquated computer technology that it contains and you'll see what a good thinking persons flick it is.

This movie reflects a major fear in the era before PCs (or microcomputers as they then were called). Few people (not even IBM as Bill Gates can attest) anticipated the rise of personal computing, thinking instead that large mainframes were the wave of the future. The logical extrapolation of this path leads to the mainframe brain represented here by Colosus and Guardian. Dated though the threat may seem, the movie still works well. A must see for all those interested in science and technology!

P.S. In the "Goofs" section of this listing, there is a paragraph entitled "Revealing Mistakes" which reports an error when Dr. Forbin blows out two candles with one breath. There is, in fact no goof. If you look at the scene prior to this when Dr. Forbin and Dr. Markham are eating dinner, there are FOUR lit candles on the table. When he blows out two candles with one breath, the lights dim after which he blows again, presumably to extinguish the remaining two candles which are off screen. The lights then dim again, as they should.

I suspect this would be more obvious if the movie was available in Widescreen rather than the Fullscreen version we've all gotten used to over the years. Hopefully, a future release of this classic movie will restore the fullness of the directors original vision.