Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970)



          Offering an imaginative sci-fi companion to Fail Safe (1964)—the chilling “what if?” drama in which a technological glitch triggers nuclear conflict—this brisk but overly talky thriller imagines what might happen if America relinquished control of its nuclear arsenal to a supercomputer. Setting aside the kitsch factor of now-dated movie imagery featuring a computer so massive it occupies the entirety of a hollowed-out mountain, Colossus has, well, colossal logic problems. The movie assumes that none of the geniuses who built the computer anticipated its likely evolution; that nobody imagined what might happen if similar systems were built by other countries; and that the entire U.S. government okayed a system lacking an “off” switch. (The script provides an explanation for that last item, but the explanation is a dodgy storytelling workaround.) Even with its flaws, however, Colossus is a noteworthy entry in the continuum of stories about the dangers of runaway artificial intelligence, a topic that gains more importance with each passing year.

          In the opening scenes, Dr. Charles A. Forbin (Eric Braeden) celebrates the launch of Colossus, a supercomputer authorized by the U.S. government to automate decisions related to the country’s nukes. As explained by Forbin, the idea is that Colossus can cycle through countless potential scenarios in seconds and then take immediate action without the impediment of emotions. Soon after Colossus goes live, America learns the Soviets have a similar system called Guardian, and Colossus demands the ability to communicate directly with Guardian. Unwisely, the American and Russian governments okay the interface, which starts a chain of events that may or may not lead to Armageddon. Meanwhile, Forbin struggles to reclaim control over Colossus, even though he designed the system to resist human intervention. And that’s basically the totality of the narrative, excepting a quasi-romantic subplot involving scientist Dr. Cleo Markham (Susan Clark)—characterization is not a priority here.

          Scripted by deft James Bridges (later to make The China Syndrome) and helmed by reliable journeyman Joseph Sargent, Colossus zips along with respectable momentum, notwithstanding the occasional lull. It also boasts consistently intelligent dialogue and a handful of clever maneuvers—for example, the sly means by which Forbin slips information out of the Colossus facility without the pesky computer noticing. The movie also benefits from an exciting and suitably futuristic score by Michael Colombier. Yet the aforementioned logic problems are mightily distracting, and it’s easy to imagine another actor doing more with the leading role than Braeden does. He’s fine whenever scenes require mild derision or smooth charm, but too often his limited range of expression flattens moments that should have radiated tension. Luckily, he’s supported by a deep bench of proficient players, including Georg Sanford Brown, William Schallert, Dolph Sweet, and—in one of those tiny roles that contributes to the epic scope of his filmography—James Hong.


Colossus: The Forbin Project: FUNKY

8 comments:

The Mutt said...

I must totally disagree about Breaden. I thought he was perfect. Of, course I was already a fan of his from Rat Patrol.

I love this movie. I first saw it as a teen. IIRC it was a Sunday Night Movie of the Week. The ending absolutely floored me. I can quote the final speech to this day.

Dale said...

i agree with the mutt. CTFP is by no means a masterpiece but it captured my imagination at a young age. The story has holes in it,but I enjoy it and find Eric Breaden quite effective. I like his restraint that barely conceals rage. Another actor might have been histrionic.

Grant said...

I have to agree with the first two comments. I don't see what ISN'T grown-up about COLOSSUS.

Peter L. Winkler said...

"Colossus has, well, colossal logic problems. The movie assumes that none of the geniuses who built the computer ran models predicting its likely evolution; that nobody bothered to check if other systems were being built by other countries; and that the entire U.S. government okayed a system lacking an “off” switch.'

First, Forbin's first name is Charles, not Jonathon. Now, on to the supposed flaws in the film's logic. I must disagree. The filmmakers make it very clear why Colossus has no off switch. If it did, an enemy saboteur could disable the system, leaving the U.S. defenseless. The CIA detected increased activity in an area of the Soviet Union, if not Guardian. The Soviets were very skilled concealing revolutionary technological developments until they were ready to reveal them, as with Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin's pioneering orbital space flight. The size of Colossus is congruent with the computers of the times, where a mainframe computer could occupy an entire floor of a building. The premise of a sentient computer had been done in sf movies -- Forbidden Planet and 2001 are notable examples, but Colossus, given its basic premise, proceeds to extrapolate from it with relentless logic, with one exception -- the murder of Kuprin, Forbin's Soviet counterpart. Colossus should have recognized that Forbin could die from a disease or in an accident. BTW, I like the casting of Eric Braeden, whose German accent may have put viewers in mind of Wernher von Braun. As for why Forbin didn't run computer models that would have predicted Colossus developing intelligence, I don't think the concept of modeling or computers powerful enough to manage it existed in the late '60s, though I'm not a scholar of computer history and could easily be mistaken.

By Peter Hanson said...

Thanks for pointing out my glitch on the character name, Peter. I've fixed that. Chances are the error arose from my general disengagement with the movie; I had seen it once prior to watching it again for this review and found it dull both times. Interesting that several readers see more in Braeden's performance than I do. It's possible that because I was familiar with his unimpressive later work in schlock TV before I first saw "Colossus," I failed to view his performance with an open mind. If so, my bad. However, I doubt that I'll ever find the will to watch "Colossus" a third time for reappraisal. And finally, regarding your logic points, fair enough. I've often found myself in the position of defending aspects of pictures I admire that others find flawed. Specifically regarding the "off" switch, you're correct that the film offers an explanation. My point (in the review) is that I don't buy the explanation, which feels too much like a convenient narrative contrivance to me. In any event, thanks as always for the detailed observations, and especially for alerting me to the character-name mistake.

Necco said...

This was a late night movie staple in the 70s, so I saw it numerous times in high school. Loved it.

Braeden does his schtick well - he's great in an episode of "The Mary Tyler Moore Show," basically a parody of himself, I suppose.

By Peter Hanson said...

2023 Update: Finally re-watched this one, and an indication of how little it grew in my estimation is that even though this was my third time through "Colossus," only about half of what happened onscreen seemed even vaguely familiar to me. Accordingly, while my rewritten review is a bit more charitable than my first take, the things that struck me as problems before still hit the same way, particularly Braeden's performance. Whatever other people are seeing there, I'm just not seeing -- though perhaps it's simply a matter of my not having had the experience of catching the picture during its original release, when everything about it might have seemed fresher. Oh, well -- I tried. Three times!

Cameron said...

Biggest logic flaw. Why didn’t they just physically obstruct the top of the missile launch tubes? E.g park a truck over the top.