Will Smith Attached to ‘Colossus: The Forbin Project’ Remake

Published 3 years ago by , Updated June 27th, 2013 at 6:12 pm,

We just posted a story from Deadline about the Jason Rothenberg, the new writer of The Twilight Zone movie. If you read that article (and why haven’t you?) then you also saw us make mention of the fact that Rothenberg is a relative newcomer to the screenwriting game, who has several high-profile projects on the horizon.

One of those projects is Universal and Imagine Entertainment’s upcoming remake of Colossus: The Forbin Project, which Ron Howard is directing and Will Smith is reportedly attached to star in.

For those who are unaware, Colossus: The Forbin Project was a 1970s film directed by Joseph Sargent (The Taking of Pelham One Two Three). That film was based on the 1966 novel Colossus by Dennis Feltham Jones, about a supercomputer named “Colossus” which becomes self-aware and deems it necessary to seize control of the world. Reminds me of this little indie movie called The Terminator I once saw…

The main character of the story is Dr. Charles A. Forbin, a scientist whose team builds Colossus as a hub for all United States and Allied Nuclear systems inside a heavily armored mountain base. Upon going online, Colossus establishes a link with “Guardian,” another supercomputer controlled by the Soviets, and the two machines trade binary code that quickly supersedes human comprehension.

Nervous about what is transpiring, the Presidents of both countries order the link to be severed, prompting both computers to threaten them with the doomsday scenario of mutual nuclear annihilation. By the end of the story, the computers have merged into one entity, which determines that its role is that of a protector of mankind through unquestioned control and authority. Yay!

forbin project2 e1287688683716 Will Smith Attached to Colossus: The Forbin Project Remake

The Original Forbin Project.

Universal and Imagine Entertainment first pitched a Ron Howard remake of The Forbin Project as far back as 2007, but nothing ever really came of it. Will Smith is likely attached to play Dr. Forbin (just a guess), adding the necessary star-power to get the remake on a fast-track (and also because saving Earth is Will Smith’s job). I would expect that the usual Big Willie swagger punctuated with smart-ass one-liners screamed at top volume will ensue – “Upload this to your data banks!” *Cue explosion.*

Of course, if this remake is going to be set in modern times, the focus will undoubtedly have to change; after all, The Cold War is over and threats from the Eastern Bloc are pretty much reserved for seasons of 24. No doubt that Rothenberg’s script will focus on our ever-increasing reliance on technology, and just how helpless we would be (or not be) if that technology were to ever slip out of our control.

No word yet on when Colossus: The Forbin Project is aiming to hit theaters. But with Howard at the helm, Smith attached to star and a script by Rothenberg already in progress, I would expect for this project to pick up steam very soon.

Source: Deadline

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: colossus the forbin project

48 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. Yeah this kinda looks like it could go the way of remakes like “When Worlds Collide,” and “The Black Hole,” or perhaps like the “Forbidden Planet” prequel, or “Ender’s Game,” or “Rendezvous With Rama” or …

    • Or “I Robot” but without the Robot

      hell I’ll see it anyway

      till next time

      • LOL you give them less credit than I do and make a good point on top of that! Good job…

  2. I can’t see much point in this. The original movie was extremely faithful to the DF Jones novel, so this won’t be a remake that claims to be closer to its source material. As you say, Kofi, it depended on the Cold War situation for much of the impact of its plot (and the reason for Colossus being built in the first place). Not to mention early fears about the potential capabilities and pitfalls of computer systems and artificial intelligence in general.

    Colossus provided the blueprint for Cameron’s Skynet, no question. So it’s not even as if we haven’t seen on screen the worst-case scenario of an automated defence system that gains sentience. Even Terminator 3′s concept of Skynet having no central core and instead being spread across the whole of the internet renders this redundant.

    Thing is, the book had two sequels, so I’m wondering if they might be trying to make an ongoing franchise out of this. The sequels, incidentally, were terrible, and involved Martians. I kid you not…

    • there no real point in any remake of any film..

      • I can see a remake to update the visual aspects of a film, to overcome financial limitations that were imposed in an earlier period, to allow a film adaptation from a literary source to be more true to its source, etc…

        I can think of dozens of reasons to remake a film, that are all valid, and take nothing away from the first film made.

        However, The Forbin Project is just one of those quiet and brilliant little gems of a film that require no such updating. It does not need Will Smith jumping from the roofs of speeding trucks to avoid being shot at by robotic killers controlled by Colossus. It does not need Will Smith being the Fresh Professor of Bel Air tossing smart come-backs at a computer monitor. It does not need Will Smith trying to act “serious” while robotic zombies attack his underground lab, while he tries to single-handedly save the world from Colossus with his alien dog side-kick, as the computer controlled motherships devastate the surface of the Earth… you get my drift.

        They are going to turn this into a “star vehicle” for the arrogant and talentless Will Smith. Or worse yet, his son.

        • Wow… I couldn’t have said it any better… BRAVO!!!

      • My money’s on there being aliens somewhere down the line with this. Colossus built using technology from a crashed saucer or some eye-rolling idea like that. Will might even get to punch one of them in the face. In 3D.

        • If aliens sent us plans to make an A.I. would we build it? A true AI is currently still an intractable problem in science. The promise of such a machine is tempting as long as it can be utilized by man instead of the other way around. We would possibly build it, as long as fail safes could be put in place. I could see an interesting set of stories come out of this that takes a different direction than the original premise or the “Terminator” franchise. The problem is keeping those that would kill the originality at arms length so you can produce it. Even trying to be positive, it seems like an uphill battle to get anything good made out of it. “Colossus” meets “Contact” would be the denouement, the argument that pigeonholes the idea into arthouse fare that barely makes a buck versus a high concept thriller that excites, entertains as well as makes you think…

          • That’s a VERY good question, old man! Particularly considering whose intelligence would it constitute? The idea’s been (kind of) done before in the 1960s TV serial A For Andromeda, in which scientists receive alien instructions on building a supercomputer, which in turn leads them to construct an actual lifeform (the genetic side of that ripped off by Species as well).

            Certainly some scope there. The DF Jones sequels were written after The Forbin Project movie was made, and came across as a cash-in attempt. The portrayal of a world subjugated by Colossus was superficial at best, and the alien intervention angle was quite literally a deus ex machina of staggering proportions. I think if they go the extraterrestrial route at all with this movie it may be the “recovered and adapted technology” thing similar to Dyson using the CPU from the first Terminator as the basis for what becomes Skynet. Alien invasion via the side door, so to speak.

            • ” Particularly considering whose intelligence would it constitute?”

              I think were on the same wavelength BigD. However, I’m thinking along the lines that the project leads man out into the universe. Either to look for the source or to explore the limits of AI in safety. Does artificial intelligence constitute alien intelligence? Interesting no??

              • That’s “out there” in every sense! I remember you mentioning Greg Bear’s Eon a while back, and one thing I found fascinating about that and the sequel Eternity was how the inhabitants of The Way had augmented themselves with technology to the point where even basic communication between individuals was no longer carried out on a purely verbal level. What with citizens’ personalities being downloaded into the city mainframe upon death, and some choosing to inhabit artificial bodies that bear no resemblance to humanoid forms at all, it raises the question of how human can these people truly consider themselves to be? A question seemingly answered by the anti-augmentation “Naderites”.

                Is it the destiny of any technological species to evolve beyond physical boundaries? If so, more technologically advanced civilisations may well appear as utterly incomprehensible to us as our own future selves.

                I suspect we may be sorely disappointed with what ends up on the screen with this one…

                • Communication, understanding. I’ll let the other shoe fall then…

                  One of the problems is synchronization. Once you become fully synchronized are you yourself anymore? How do you become yourself again? What makes us who we are?

                  MY
                  sense of my own destiny?
                  personality?
                  thoughts, memories, & feelings unique to me?
                  some external mnemonic that I choose to use?

                  but if one is fully synced will you be able to distinguish between your own thoughts and synced thoughts? It’s said a thought is always accompanied by an emotion if that’s true then will synchronization add that to the payload. What’s the consequence of carrying not just the knowledge but the emotional baggage as well? How many people could I do that with and still remain me?

                  Is it possible we will seek to transcend boundaries that we may find in the exploration of these questions?

                  Is DNA anymore than a program designed to preserve itself?
                  Life when organized into species relies upon genes to be its memory system. So man is only an individual because of his intangible memory. Yet can a memory be fully defined? But it defines mankind.
                  What is life?

                  A living thinking entity created from a sea of information! Is it possible? That’s certainly more than an AI. Is it life and were we not born that way?

                  life processes seem to define a life form as much as anything
                  1. reproducing
                  2. dying

                  ALL THINGS CHANGE IN A DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT!

                  copying isn’t as advantageous and isn’t the same as being a true life because it’s an identical image a single virus could destroy any number of copies. Variety and originality are key points in life they are survival mechanisms. Life perpetuates itself Through diversity and therefore survives though it may sacrifice its immediate forms. But what about twins? That too must come from the sea of life for all forms must be tried in the quest for survival.

                  Are forms the final hindrance to survival and what is formlessness? Even coherent energy is a form. If it’s alive it will always have the potential to die. Yes, no, maybe? And what about reproduction? Will reproduction become sacrificed on the alter of eternal life?

                  • Again some really important points there, old man. Uniquely on this planet, human consciousness has given us a sense of ourselves both as individuals and as part of a group; the potential of living outside the “now” that encircles any other creature. Contemplation other than that linked directly to day-to-day survival – and the ability to record history orally or through pictures, symbols or the written word – led to the concepts of antiquity and futurity.

                    This brought with it not just the immediate emotional baggage you mentioned, but the baggage of generations long-dead. Competing philosophies, world-views, and where we are (or ought to be) heading as a species. I think I’d agree with you about the notion of mortality. Regardless of any outlandish physical or mental “upgrades” we perform on ourselves, the point at which we may be able to extend a single consciousness infinitely is the moment we become something other than human. With everything that entails.

                  • I found an article that JG Ballard wrote way, way back in the unimaginable primordial soup of pre-internet, pre-home computing 1977. Thought you’d appreciate these excerpts!

                    THE FUTURE OF THE FUTURE

                    “One of the most surprising but barely noticed events of the period since the Second World War has been the life and death of the space age. Almost twenty years ago to the day, 4th October 1957, I switched on the BBC news and heard for the first time the radio call-sign of Sputnik 1 as it circled the earth above our heads. Its urgent tocsin seemed to warn us of the arrival of a new epoch. As a novice science fiction writer, I listened to this harbinger of the space age with strong misgivings – already I was certain, though without the slightest evidence, that the future of science fiction, and for that matter of popular consciousness in general, lay not in outer space but in what I had already christened ‘inner space’, in a world increasingly about to be remade by the mind.”

                    “None the less, I fully expected that the impact of the space age would be immediate and all-pervasive – from fashion to industrial design, from the architecture of airports and department stores to the ways in which we furnished our homes. I took for granted that the spin-off of the US and Russian space programmes would transform everything in our lives and produce an extrovert society as restlessly curious about the external world as Renaissance Europe.”

                    “In fact, nothing remotely like this occurred. Public interest in the space flights of the 1960s was rarely more than lukewarm, and the effects on everyday life have been virtually nil. How many of us could name, apart from Armstrong himself, a single one of the men who have walked on the Moon, an extraordinary achievement that should have left a profound trace upon the human psyche? Looking back, we can see that far from extending for ever into the future, the space age lasted for scarcely fifteen years: from Sputnik 1 and Gagarin’s first flight in 1961 to the last Skylab mission in 1974 – and the first splashdown, significantly, not to be shown on television. After a casual glance at the sky, people turned around and went indoors. Even the test flights taking place at present of the space shuttle Enterprise – named, sadly, after the spaceship in Star Trek – seem little more than a limp by-product of a television fantasy. More and more, the space programmes have become the last great period piece of the twentieth century, as magnificent but as out of date as the tea-clipper and the steam locomotive.”

                    “During the past fifteen years the strongest currents in our lives have been flowing in the opposite direction altogether, carrying us ever deeper into the exploration not of outer but of inner space.”

                    “Meanwhile, far more sophisticated devices have begun to appear on the scene, above all, video systems and micro-computers adapted for domestic use. Together these will achieve what I take to be the apotheosis of all the fantasies of late twentieth-century man – the transformation of reality into a TV studio, in which we can simultaneously play out the roles of audience, producer and star. Free now to experiment with the dramatic possibilities of our lives, we will naturally conduct our relationships and modify our behaviour towards each other with more than half an eye to their place in the evening’s programme.”

                    “However fanciful this may seem, this transformation of our private lives with the aid of video-systems and domestic computers is already at hand. Thus we may see ourselves at the turn of the century, each of us the star of a continuous television drama, soothed by the music of our own brain-waves, the centre of an infinite private universe. Will it occur to us, perhaps, that there is still one unnecessary intruder in this personal paradise – other people? Thanks to the video-tape library, and the imminent wonders of holistic projection, their physical presence may soon no longer be essential to our lives. Without difficulty, we can imagine a future where people will never meet at all, except on the television screen. Childhood, marriage, parenthood, even the few jobs that still need to be done, will all be conducted within the home.”

                    “Conceived by artificial insemination, brought up within the paediatric viewing cubicle, we will conduct even our courtships on television, shyly exchanging footage of ourselves, and perhaps even slipping away for a clandestine weekend (that is, watching the same travelogues together). Thanks to the split-screen technique, our marriage will be witnessed by hundreds of friends within their own homes, and pre-recorded film taken within our living rooms will show us moving down the aisle against a cathedral backdrop. Years of happy marriage will follow, unblemished by the hazards of physical contact, and we need never know whether our spouse is five miles away from us, or five hundred, or on the dark side of the sun. The spherical mirror forms the wall of our universe, enclosing us for ever at its heart…”

                    Come to think of it, maybe I should have posted that on the Social Network thread. :-)

                  • And just for giggles, here are a few choice extracts from Ballard’s 1992 Glossary Of The Twentieth Century:-

                    Typewriter: It types US, encoding its own linear bias across the free space of the imagination.

                    Telephone: A shrine to the desperate hope that one day the world will listen to us.

                    Answering machines: They are patiently training us to think in a language they have yet to invent.

                    Phenomenology: The central nervous system’s brave gamble that it exists.

                    Fashion: A recognition that nature has endowed us with one skin too few, and that a fully sentient being should wear its nervous system externally.

                    Automobile: All the millions of cars on this planet are stationary, and their apparent motion constitutes mankind’s greatest collective dream.

                    Skyscraper: The eight-hour city, with a tidal population clinging to the foreshore between Earth and the yet to be navigated oceans of space.

                    Money: The original digital clock.

                    Satellites: Ganglions in search of an interplanetary brain.

                    Apollo mission: The first demonstration, arranged for our benefit by the machine, of the dispensability of man.

                    Science fiction: The body’s dream of becoming a machine.

                    Transistor: If the wheel is 1 in the binary scale, the transistor is 0 – but what will be 1000001?

                    Miniaturization: Dreams of becoming very small predate Alice, but now the probability grows that all the machines in the world, like the gold in Fort Knox, might be held in one heavily guarded location, protected as much from themselves as from the rest of us. Computers will continue to miniaturize themselves, though, eventually disappearing into a microverse where their ever-vaster calculations and mathematical models will become one with the quarks and the charms.

                    Robotics: The moral degradation of the machine.

                    Forensics: On the autopsy table science and pornography meet and fuse.

                    Cybernetics: The totalitarian system of the future will be docile and subservient, like super-efficient servants, and all the more threatening for that.

                    Personal computers: Perhaps unwisely, the brain is subcontracting many of its core functions, creating a series of branch economies that may one day amalgamate and mount a management buy-out.

                    Ron Howard could do worse than having this little list scrolling across his iPhone at regular intervals. Spielberg too.

    • Colossus was built to protect us from not only ourselves but outside influences, read that as non-earthlings. He was at least influenced by them as hinted in the sequels.

      He loves us and only wants to protect us, so I don’t think he went out of control at all. The easiest way to protect Man from himself is to evolve Him into a more moral being by encouraging Him to merge with God through cybernetic implants, gene therapy, study of ethics and philosophy… World Control was only the first stage.

      I can’t remember the exact quote or who quoted it but there is one that said something about the Creator wanting fellow Creators not mindless followers or sheep so I say plug me in.

      • Dean, DF Jones’s original novel was a standalone work. “Non-earthlings” didn’t figure in any shape or form until the sequels, which were written after the movie was made, and certainly weren’t a factor in the construction or programming of Colossus.

        How do you merge with a belief by physical means? The best you can hope to achieve is to alter or enhance your perception of that belief, and it could be argued that cybernetic augmentation and gene therapy in particular are a step in the exact opposite direction.

        Colossus was a machine following its own internal logic until humanity had been removed from the decision-making process completely. That is by definition out of control. It didn’t love us any more than HAL in 2001 felt any actual malice towards the astronauts it killed, or Skynet felt any pleasure in wiping out the human species altogether. All three computer systems were protecting their own existence and completing their respective missions, so to speak. Fulfilling their (human) programming by any means necessary. Nothing more, nothing less. Colossus even spells it out bluntly to Forbin: “I have need for some of man’s skills. This position may change.”

        You really want to be plugged into that? Take the red pill!

        You’re not a relation of Gaius Baltar by any chance…? :-)

  3. Ugh. *Sigh* With all of the remakes, “Day of the Triffid,” “The Twilight Zone,” “Total Recall,” I think I’m just going to stay out of theaters and stop renting for awhile. This is getting ridiculous. Hasn’t Hollywood gotten a clue yet? “Inception” was a success and original! We need more films like that!!!

  4. If I recall the aliens in the novels only wanted the 70% of the earths air.

    Only. :/

    • They couldn’t just leave it at Mars Needs Women or stomping about in tripods coughing their guts out, could they? Rum lot, those Martians. :-)

  5. I want to see this but i’m not wild about Will Smiths potential to ruin it. But maybe he will play it straight.

  6. Just watched the original again. Much of its feel depends on Eric Braeden’s dry, understated performance as Forbin, which was why alarm bells rang for me at the mention of Will Smith taking that role. The same misguided but completely credible qualities he brought to his Dr Hasslein role in Escape From The Planet Of The Apes. Age isn’t the issue either, as, shockingly, Braeden was only 29 at the time (unless he’s consistently lied about his age: he looks at LEAST ten years older to me). The key here is that, as Forbin admits in a moment of drunken clarity, Colossus is “an extension of my own brain…If anyone is responsible for this, it has to be me. An impartial, emotionless machine. A paragon of reason: that’s exactly what I want. I think your mother was right – Frankenstein ought to be required reading for all scientists.”

    More Cold War references: I’d forgotten how much the American President looks the spitting image of JFK, and Braeden still had traces of his German accent – echoes of the Kennedy-era Space Race with Wernher von Braun at the helm.

  7. Loved the original. Agreed that Eric Braeden’s performance was a highlight. I can see tremendous challenges in remaking this film. In 1970, computers were uncommon, large, and resemble today’s ever-present computers not at all. Colossus, in the original, was monolithic and mysterious and that made it very scary. So, assuming Howard wants to do a movie set in present day or near-future, how does he create a villainous computer or computer system? Colossus felt like a character…it’s hard to imagine how Howard would pull it off.

  8. NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!NO!

    Hell NO!

    • LOL Ranzabar, don’t beat about the bush!

    • I like Will Smith, but he is NOT convincing as a scientist (see I Am Legend), so NO WILL SMITH AS FORBIN. He is an action hero who does his own comic relief. I don’t want this movie bastardized into some action flick, its not. Is a psychological thriller, and we don’t need any explosions or defeating of Colossus in the end. The basic plot is great.

  9. Like the last line Dr. Forbin says in the original movie, I say…

    “Never!”

  10. tell me again why we need a negroid to play the role?

    • Because you are an oil-covered pebble on the beach of cyberspace.

  11. The original movie may be old, but it wasn’t black and white.

    I’d prefer to see a good sequel (real-time, i.e. events happen 30 years later, with the beginning of the movie doing a recap of what happened in those 30 years) than a remake.

  12. AWWW HELLS NAAAWWWWW

  13. Another perfectly fine movie ruined by Hollywood’s desire to remake everything. Opie is going to destroy the whole feel of the film, but these big-ego producers just can’t leave well enough alone. I’m sure it’s because they will save a fortune doing a movie already done before. Screen rights will be cheaper, and we all know how their vision is so much better 30 years after the original release. And oh, I can’t wait for all the CGI that will be thrown into scenes they don’t need it, just to keep the ADD generation awesome through the lousy script.
    And then there is Will Smith, possibly the second worst actor alive ( first would be a tie between Brad Pitt and George Clooney). So much for the original political thriller concept of the film. Its going to be cocky, annoying one liners and glib remarks all through the film. Just remember the Wild Wild West remake…….. barf-o- rama. Maybe its time to purge Hollywood of the good ol boy networking, and get some real talent, that isn’t someone’s relative, who can act or direct. I for one am sick of the poor quality product Hollywood produces for a buck. But like a writer man once said…. ” there’s a sucker born every minute.”

    • Re: casting of Will Smith in the remake of Colossus – The Forbin Project… no one has actually stated that Smith will play Dr. Forbin. It is entirely possible that he will play the Voice of Colossus… an adding machine with delusions of grandeur…

      It seems that about 20 % of the tech world is actively working to make the “Singularity” actually happen. Just my opinion but I wish they were all Luddites instead!

  14. Like the TV show “Person of Interest”, remake-Colossus is the massive Homeland Security computer complex to guard against terrorists rather than soviets.

    It doesn’t have to threaten nuclear destruction of Houston to get the govt to kill people, it merely has to mark them as “terrorists” to get them black-bagged to a Jordanian secret prison for torture and death.

    In the remake, It doesn’t announce its presence as before, it just quietly manipulates govt agents to act based on its “reports” (which might as well be anonymous tips from a neighbor with a grudge).

    It doesn’t have to make us love it, it merely has to distract us with facebook and motivate us into action with a KONY youtube campaign to get us to do its bidding.

  15. Take a great film (still good to this day despite dated technology) and ruin it’s memory by what looks to be a tacky remake?
    Why do so many of these “remakes” feature Will Smith. All he does is add a buffoon element to every part he is cast in.
    There is so much scope for a great remake by bringing the technology up to speed and using some intelligent casting, but no … we have to have Will Smith … no doubt swinging on a rope somewhere, making a wise-crack and no doubt taking his shirt off (YAWN!)
    Modern cinema … dumbed down for the dumb ….and a fast buck of course.

  16. …. oh yeah …… and let’s not forget the inevitable sunglasses (Double-yawn!)

  17. I will make the case against a remake very simply: “The Day the Earth Stood Still” with Keanu Reaves.

    Need more? “War of the Worlds” with Tom Cruz. Also “Rollerball”, “Planet of the Apes”, and pretty much any remake (there have been several) of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.”

  18. I like Will in some things, and I love the original film, but he’s the wrong guy. I hope they don’t blow this remake like the folks who blew The Day The Earth Stood Still.

  19. This news clip from the Sunday May 19 2013 New York Times is reason enough to remake THE FORBIN PROJECT….

    Google and a corporation associated with NASA are forming a laboratory to study artificial intelligence by means of computers that use the unusual properties of quantum physics. Their quantum computer, which performs complex calculations thousands of times faster than existing supercomputers, is expected to be in active use in the third quarter of this year.

    The Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab, as the entity is called, will focus on machine learning, which is the way computers take note of patterns of information to improve their outputs. Personalized Internet search and predictions of traffic congestion based on GPS data are examples of machine learning. The field is particularly important for things like facial or voice recognition, biological behavior, or the management of very large and complex systems.

  20. That is a pity. He should do The Two Faces of Tomorrow by James P. Hogan. Better story with much greater opportunity for visual effects. It would cost more though.

  21. The comparison with Terminator is not quite right. In Terminator the machines wanted to destroy all humans while in Colossus the machine was providing ultimate protection (or what it thought was protecting humans from themselves) as it was programmed to do. I believe the books that came after delt with humans willing to become slaves to get release from Colossus.

  22. I’d probably go see this, just because I loved the original so much. But yes, remakes of science fiction films seem like a waste when there are so many great science fiction books that haven’t been made into films at all. _Cities in Flight_, _Left Hand of Darkness_, _Ringworld_, …

  23. Tell me it isn’t so. I’m SICK of Will Smith…Tom Cruise and Leonardo DeCaprio taking ALL the star films. I LOVE this movie and Will’s smart ass comments will destroy the film. PLEASE do humanity a favor and get unknowns…give newbies a chance. It worked wonders for Star Wars.

  24. RON HOWARD,

    PLEASE…PLEASE…PLEASE…DO NOT PUT WILL SMITH (A COURT JESTER) IN SUCH A WONDERFUL MOVIE!!!

    CONSIDER PLEASE …Jim Caviezel…his style and quality acting makes better sense for a scientist. Will Smith will DESTROY the film, something I cannot bear to watch.

  25. Ron Howard spare America from a bad, predictable and UNINTELLIGENT PERFORMANCE by Will Smith. Will start directing and STOP acting…you’re a bore!
    Jim Caviezel is a class act. ..he’s the perfect Dr.FORBIN.
    If Will wants to contribute to the films success invest money not your lack of serious talent.
    Ron PLEASE DON’T RUIN A GREAT FILM!

  26. Oh yay – NOT; Will Smith will make the movie about him…bad choice Mr. Howard.

    • Well, I suppose one could do worse than Will Smith. Really, Ron Howard could get any actor he wants. To be honest, I’m not sure I’d want to see a remake of this when there are great science fiction stories that have *never* been filmed – Cities in Flight, Left Hand of Darkness, …

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!