abbedafaria Only thing I do not understand is this demand for "remake", is there any problem so that westerners cannot watch old movies again? I bet the new movie would be disgusting mishmash of sex, "action" = at least 40 -50 dead people...simply the crap as it is made today...most of the movies.I like it the way it is...it keeps distinct amount of dignity and decency, rarely seen in todays crap.Just nice movie. Intelligent and meaningful.And no happy ending.Should see those IT fanatics and enthusiasts.

SnoopyStyle Dr. Forbin (Eric Braeden) is the lead designer of the supercomputer Colossus that is put in control of America's nuclear arsenal. It is situated under a mountain in charge of its own security. It soon discovers its secret Soviet counterpart, the Guardian. The two computers join up to become a new supercomputer and threaten to launch nuclear weapons unless the world follows its plan for humankind and the world. Forbin and others try to resist. The computers threats becomes deadly and more unforgiving.The premise is unrealistic but it's cold war paranoia and also computer paranoia. This is a movie in love with set designs more than any dialog writing or acting. The acting is terribly stiff and the direction is pretty stiff also. It's reminiscent of an older form of sci-fi. The basic idea of the computers taking over the world gets better treatment later on. I do like the unhappy ending. This is a movie in need of action and more realism.

jmillerdp Yes, the movie came out in 1970, so the computer stuff and general surroundings are dated. But, luckily, legendary Visual Effects artist Albert Whitlock is on hand to provide some very key effects at the beginning to help us buy into the film's premise of a very powerful computer just going online.This computer, Colossus, is given complete control over the United States' defenses. As you can imagine, that doesn't end up being the greatest decision ever made!What follows is for you to see. This really is a great movie, and needs to be seen for not just Sci-Fi fans, but thriller fans.Director Joseph Sargent helmed many good films, my favorite of which is another thriller, "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three." That also should be seen!All the attributes work: film score, cinematography, acting, etc. And, the ending has quite a nice kick. Recommended!******** (8 Out of 10 Stars)

Alfred Dato I have read some of the other reviews of this movie and fail to understand the big accolades given to this movie and all for the wrong reasons. The thought of machines taking over man makes for a very powerful and thought provoking story but hardly credible for many reasons. One has to see the movies A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001) and the Bicentennial Man (1999) to appreciate the absurdity of machines having any human consciousness at all. Unlike the cult movie The Terminator (1984) the director cleverly removes the viewer from having to think about the origins of the machines. For a computer with programmable commands to transition to a conscious living being capable of making decisions by itself is just not possible. Feed all the raw power that is available in this world including the super chips of today and you will still not be able to give it a consciousness. I can tell you coming from a very technical background that the 'conscious' level cannot be programmed into a computer, it is one of the marvels of all living beings. It is an impossible goal like trying to synthesize life.I managed to have my say in an area where others just can't seem to see, so lets get back to reviewing this movie. The beginning of the movie has many flaws aside from the points I mentioned above. Here we have a super computer machine plugged into the US defense system without any testing trials of any kind? As the machine spirals out of control we find the unsurprised Dr. Forbin taking the whole incident like another walk in the park. Any scientist would be flabbergasted to know that their creation has a mind of its own and is doing things completely outside the boundaries of its intended function. The problem is that everyone around the colossus machine comes to treat it like another being far too quickly which seems unreal. This naturally takes the attention away from Dr. Forbin, whose head should have been on a platter by now for creating such a dastardly beast. Despite this, the film takes a better turn and becomes more believable when Colossus assumes his role as master of the world and appoints Dr. Forbin to do its bidding.The acting by Eric Braeden playing Dr. Forbin is pretty poor at the beginning as there is a complete lack of amazement and wonder as Colossus assumes the personality of an actual living conscious thing. However, his acting is much better when he is under house arrest and makes his colleague Susan Clark playing Dr. Cleo Markham as his mistress. The technical content of the movie from hereon has been well portrayed by the director and is quite realistic. The director has been able to convey a chilling and a horrifying account of events that ensues as Colossus works out a grand master plan to rule the world.Putting aside the poor acting of the characters in the first twenty minutes of the movie, the film does move ahead well portraying a sinister nature of a human invention that ultimately takes control of the world. The ending seemed a bit abrupt and I was expecting more but it does leave the viewer wondering about the terrible events that follows. It is also fitting to see how Dr. Forbin's greatest invention becomes his worst nightmare.