By Ron Howard, reportedly (google it).

Question: I'm fond of the original, and am halfway hopeful for a decent remake (the track record of recent remakes aside).

But would you be disappointed if Tom Hanks is cast as Forbin? I'd like to think Howard is smarter than that but who knows. I probably couldn't stand to sit through it then. Hanks is ok in some things, but in others...no. As Forbin? No way.

It will suck.

yeah, probly

This is one of my all time favorite films and while I generally take a dim view of remakes, I'd love to see Hanks as Forbin.

The problem is that the original was such a cold war mentality film that I don't know how you would update it convincingly. Unless you were to substitute Guardian as a Chinese Defense System rather than Russian to make it a more credible problem.

Oh, I could see it as a very interesting film in which you have a zealous presidential administration create this super computer in the name of "Homeland Security".

Said computer locates and wipes out the terrorist threat and everybody is happy until they realize it can't be turned off and it has it's own particular interpretation of the Patriot Act and turns it's eyes to domestic affairs..and with access to cell phones and CCTV, turns America into a paranoid Big Brother like State.

Hanks as the "Haunted Creator"? yeah, I could see it.

But they'd have to have the Balls to keep the original ending.

That would suck squared; the whole "guvmint's gonna GITCHA!" fever dream is already as boring as a Cold War approach, and has been death at the box office for more than one flick. But it's still a plausible if not likely approach on their part.

Has there been renewed interest in this project?

So far as I can tell, Howard's Colossus project (first announced back in 2007) has fallen by the wayside.

Howard is about to start shooting the feature film version of the Arrested Development TV series. Beyond that, nothing else has been announced.

I must say, Howard did a fantastic job with Frost/Nixon, which is probably my favorite Ron Howard film ever (as well as being my second favorite film of the year, after WALLe)

articles say production starts rolling this summer, but that's what the internets say so...

That would suck squared; the whole "guvmint's gonna GITCHA!" fever dream is already as boring as a Cold War approach, and has been death at the box office for more than one flick. But it's still a plausible if not likely approach on their part.

It's not neccisarily(sp?) an "anti gov't" theme, I'm proposing, here.
The gov't would honestly be trying to do the right thing and having the nobelist intentions in devising a system that would take human soldiers out of the line of fire.

It's just that the supercomputer (like in the original) would gain it's own sentience and grow it's own black/white moral code. It's just that it would have access to tools (like GPS and CCTV) that weren't around at the time of the original film. It's really more of a "see what your blind trust in technology has gotten you" type of film.

This would have been a natural role for Jeff Goldblum

Hey, lookatthat, articles ARE from '07. My apologies to HT, Mr. Howard and Colossus (don't nuke me, C)

It's not neccisarily(sp?) an "anti gov't" theme, I'm proposing, here.
The gov't would honestly be trying to do the right thing and having the nobelist intentions in devising a system that would take human soldiers out of the line of fire.

It's just that the supercomputer (like in the original) would gain it's own sentience and grow it's own black/white moral code. It's just that it would have access to tools (like GPS and CCTV) that weren't around at the time of the original film. It's really more of a "see what your blind trust in technology has gotten you" type of film.

Sorry I misread you. But would it surprise you if, about 2/3rs in, it turns out the originally neutral, noble programming had been corrupted by some...shall we say...Rovian administration type bent on world conquest or some similar nefarious scheme? Wouldn't surprise me, but I'm willing to be surprised by these things.

Unless it's something directed by the Warchofsky brothers, or whatever their name is.

(don't nuke me, C)

Lol, no worries. For all I know the movie will still happen, although EAGLE EYE may have taken some of the wind out of Howard's sails (in much the same way THE ISLAND put a crimp in the Bryan Singer/ Joel Silver LOGAN'S RUN remake).

"Sorry I misread you. But would it surprise you if, about 2/3rs in, it turns out the originally neutral, noble programming had been corrupted by some...shall we say...Rovian administration type bent on world conquest or some similar nefarious scheme? Wouldn't surprise me, but I'm willing to be surprised by these things."

Nah, I think it would much more compelling if the Hero of the story (Forbin) is also the villian without any outside tampering. That way you make social comment on how we as a society love to build up Heroes and then turn and tear them down and villify them.

Carson,
you are correct there! between Eagle Eye and Enemy of the State, this is well worn territory.

To me, what "Colossus" is to cyber-thrillers is what "Lord of the Rings" is to fantasy epics. Often ripped-off but never equaled.

Another thought I had was that the original story also tapped into people's basic fear and distrust of computers in general. Something that would be near impossible to believe today.

I checked the copyright date on the novel and it's 1966. It may have actually preceded HAL-9000, but don't quote me on that.

I don't know how you could instill that same fear today.

But they'd have to have the Balls to keep the original ending.


I always thought the ending of the original book was a lot more ballsy. Both end with Colossus telling Forbin he will lead mankind into a glorious new future without war where decisions are made based on logic, and human's will learn to accept it, appreciate it, and perhaps even worship Colossus as a god. The movie ends with Forbin's defiant "Never!", the book ends with Colossus' more thoughtful "Never?".

One of my favorite books from my childhood.

Said computer locates and wipes out the terrorist threat and everybody is happy until they realize it can't be turned off and it has it's own particular interpretation of the Patriot Act and turns it's eyes to domestic affairs..and with access to cell phones and CCTV, turns America into a paranoid Big Brother like State.

Didn't they do that plot recently with Eagle Eye?

Opps. Sorry, replied to Lou's post before reading the rest of the thread. But hey, we're all thinking alike ;)

hey better tom hanks than jeff goldblum

Not only is this one of my favorite little thrillers of all time, Forbin is my screen name on several other bboards! I definitely don't see a need for this. Both of the films cautionary subtexts - the cold war, and a warning against computers taking over - are SO obsolete in this day and age.

Except, I guess, for the Terminator storyline, which takes an opposite tactic - peace thru mass death, rather than peace thru the threat of it.

But would you be disappointed if Tom Hanks is cast as Forbin?

With Ron Howard directing, Hanks is not the worry. Akiva Goldsman is the worry.

Let the Execrable Akiva script this, and you know I'll avoid it.

Not only is this one of my favorite little thrillers of all time, Forbin is my screen name on several other bboards! I definitely don't see a need for this. Both of the films cautionary subtexts - the cold war, and a warning against computers taking over - are SO obsolete in this day and age.

Except, I guess, for the Terminator storyline, which takes an opposite tactic - peace thru mass death, rather than peace thru the threat of it.

I always thought one of the reasons DF Jones novel and the film are so compelling (besides being a great and original-idea thriller), is because when you reflect on it, there's a real case that can be made that you should be rooting for Colossus.

And I agree, I think the only way you could do a remake that totally wouldn't suck would be a period piece. As for casting, the last time I saw Eric Braeden on TV he looked like he could still pull off Forbin, though it's been awhile.

I always thought one of the reasons DF Jones novel and the film are so compelling (besides being a great and original-idea thriller), is because when you reflect on it, there's a real case that can be made that you should be rooting for Colossus.

And I agree, I think the only way you could do a remake that totally wouldn't suck would be a period piece. As for casting, the last time I saw Eric Braeden on TV he looked like he could still pull off Forbin, though it's been awhile.

I get the same feeling Watching the new Battlestar Galactica.

I root for the Cylons

hey better tom hanks than jeff goldblum

GOOD point. I stand corrected. Goldblum as Forbin:

"Well, um...Colossus? We are just, just...WONDERING if, um, you [eyes widen, deep inhale] would like to, to, to, to, GIVE us BACK our...um...our CONTROL of our nuclear missILES?" [eyes remain bug-wide, staring at input terminal]

yeah, I'll take Hanks.

As for casting, the last time I saw Eric Braeden on TV he looked like he could still pull off Forbin, though it's been awhile.

I see him all the time in the checkout lane (mag covers). Yes he darn well could do Forbin, more believably than before.

Lol, no worries. For all I know the movie will still happen, although EAGLE EYE may have taken some of the wind out of Howard's sails (in much the same way THE ISLAND put a crimp in the Bryan Singer/ Joel Silver LOGAN'S RUN remake).

"C" meant Colossus, but don't you nuke me either :hat:

Instead of Guardian, Hanks will be matching wits with Microsoft's latest version of Vista.

Gene

In an age where nearly everything is already controlled by computers, how could this story line possibly be more relevant? Don't forget, Colossus didn't keep humans around because it felt "morally" compelled to do so, Colossus had no morals! Only "logic". Once humans were no longer useful, we would either be reduced to a token population (possibly useful for a few purposes) or eliminated altogether.

Ever heard of the "Future Combat Systems" program? The effort to integrate all military forces under one computer driven command system? Or "UCAVs"? What about all the grief that the Pentagon takes over the lives lost in foreign wars? How long will it be before that grief drives the government to more and more unmanned combat systems? How hard will it be to make an M-1 tank, F-22 fighter or any other weapons system remote controlled? Or autonomous? Or..? Most of the work to convert these types of systems has already been done but so far, the desire to take humans out of the fight has not been great enough to justify the expense. But that desire grows with each passing day, doesn't it?

Once these systems have reached a certain level of autonomy, why not go the next step and link them to one master system for command and control? Not to mention that the old reason Colossus was built is still valid too, to guarantee that any nation that attacks us would itself be attacked, no matter how many people were killed here.

Yes, this film could be remade and as a much more detailed and realistic cautionary tale. And even more relevant.

Sure you're not talking about Skynet, Phil?

Gene

. . . Once these systems have reached a certain level of autonomy, why not go the next step and link them to one master system for command and control?Sure you're not talking about Skynet, Phil?And we mustn't discount the possibility that some teen whiz kid could hack into the system and accidentally start Armageddon!
http://blog.beliefnet.com/moviemom/wargames.jpg

^That's the new ending. Colossus succedes in taking over the world, but a teen hacker convinces it the whole thing is just a game and saves us all.

........Then the kid realizes he is in a pod run by a computer that took over the world centuries ago.

Then he wakes up and finds Patrick Duffy in the shower . . . and says, "Oh, crap! I'm in the wrong movie!"

"In one of the countless billions of areas in the Hobbytalk universe lies a medium-sized forum, and one of its threads, a green and insignificant one, is now dead. But at least it ended funny."

Then he wakes up and finds Patrick Duffy in the shower . . . and says, "Oh, crap! I'm in the wrong movie!"
... who then wakes up in bed, rolls over next to someone and says "Honey, I just had the strangest dream..." (or words to that effect) and it turns out he's in bed next to Suzanne Pleshett. :D



BTW - in honor of this thread I'm pulling out my copy of Colosus, The "Forbin" Project and watching it when I sign off. Well, it'll be running in the background as I paint, anyhow....

semi OT but not really...
There was something in that movie which showed something that is very common today but I'm pretty sure was rare if not unheard of back then.

Towards the end, a kid is shown wearing a t-shirt with the Colossus logo on it to show C's beginning as a cultural influence. Now I know messages on T-shirts are about as old as t-shirts themselves, but I don't think I remember seeing a corporate logo presented as merchandise in movies before that.

Pretty ahead of it's time, I think.

Towards the end, a kid is shown wearing a t-shirt with the Colossus logo on it to show C's beginning as a cultural influence. Now I know messages on T-shirts are about as old as t-shirts themselves, but I don't think I remember seeing a corporate logo presented as merchandise in movies before that.

Well, except for The 5000 Fingers of Dr. T. :p

http://www.mrbalihai.com/goof/images2/5FDT.jpg

but wouldn't that fall under wearing a "school" sweater? like a college letterman's jacket?

but wouldn't that fall under wearing a "school" sweater? like a college letterman's jacket?

Well, if you want to be technical about it, I guess you're right. ;)

Hard to beat that beanie though.

http://www.shorpy.com/images/photos/happyfingers.jpg