Bardlerx Strictly average movie

Ploydsge just watch it!

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

Allissa .Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Wuchak Released in 1936 and based on HG Wells' 1933 book, "Things to Come" envisions a future that suffers three decades of world war, a human-made plague and a new one-world order that opens the way for space travel. Wells' story was a fantastical hope for a future in which everybody will "come to Jesus" only to him "Jesus" was socialism and obeying a world government. To come to this point we must first endure a second world war that lasts 30 years and destroys the planet, thrusting us into a new Dark Age. As such, this is a post-apocalyptic movie with the corresponding 'mutants' (the plague victims) decades before that genre came into vogue.While I reject socialism (which is basically communism with a smile), there's a lot of truth to Wells' message, which was that the individual's life and actions are inconsequential when compared to the purpose and progress of the entire human race. Both the film's ideology and message are irrelevant to whether a movie is entertaining or not, for me anyway. The problem with "Things to Come" is the story itself, which focuses on three basic times: 1940 (which was five years in the future when the film was made), 1970 and 2036. The mid-section is the longest and dullest, focusing on an annoyingly pompous warlord called "The Boss" or "The Chief" (Ralph Richardson). The story structure simply isn't conducive to involving characters and movie-length drive. The last act is interesting not because of the story but due to its depiction of the future (2036), which is similar to the futuristic portrayal seen in 1976' "Logan's Run" and pretty much holds up. Wells was way off, however, in regards to humanity making it to the moon, which took place 70 years before his prediction.In its day I'm sure this was an amazing movie, dull characters & tale or not, but great films hold up over time, like 1933's "King Kong" and 1939's "The Wizard of Oz." "Things to Come" generally doesn't. Yet it's still worth checking out as a period piece. The film was shot in B&W, but there's a colorized version (which I viewed). It runs 100 minutes and was shot in Denham Studios, Buckinghamshire, England. DIRECTOR: William Cameron Menzies. GRADE: C-

Blueghost I've seen this film several times, and most of the time I see it as a simple version of one man's view of "the future". But occasionally my political and social hackles get all fired up, and I see the intent of the author. But then I settle down because the 1930's science fiction film really didn't get too much right, but it is kind of entertaining to see anyway.Wells' film takes its cues from the first World War, and attempts to prophesier the fate of mankind should war continue unabated. The narrative describing the story is somewhat odd because it's more driven by a future historic narrative than any real plot per se. Instead of a plot with characters and story we see a familial line contend with a speculative history.And that structure is the charm of such manifestos like this one, because it breaks the mold of traditional story telling. We see ancestors and forefathers. We see the world that is (or was), and we see how the world was transformed from near barbaric annihilation to a more hopeful outlook, and beyond.As per Christopher Frayling's interview on the Criterion blu-ray / DVD, the film is essentially a political and social manifesto of what Wells' believed could be the future, and how his version of an ideal society would come about. Again, it's a 1930's version of "the future", so you have to put yourself in the mindset of a white male living a successful life in 1930s UK or New York. Technical notes; the special effects are respectable, save for some of the miniature work. The sets are lavish, the props and costumes are okay (save for one item), and for a 1930's production it's fairly decent science fiction film making. Seventy years later Wells' predictions haven't exactly come to pass, so in the immediate sense thematically it does come across as a bit of an anachronism, but if you don't take it too seriously it is kind of entertaining as a sort of alternative Earth, like so many other science fiction stories. But, thematically again, like a lot of science fiction, the short comings of the film come from Wells' proposed solutions to mankind's ills. And not to put too much of a 21st century spin on this review, but all of the survivors of the human race in this film, are white. Again, it's a 1930's white male perspective on the future.As a piece of science fiction spectacle, it's worth seeing once or twice.

Python Hyena Things to Come (1936): Dir: William Cameron Menzies / Cast: Raymond Massey, Edward Chapman, Cedric Hardwicke, Ralph Richardson, Margaretta Scott: Early science fiction film with a title that refers to our unpredictable future and dire uncertainty but the film's structure is completely predictable. A strange being lands on earth with a message. He doesn't tell us to give up smoking or use a particular brand of deodorant. No, he tells us everything that we do not want to hear because there isn't a soul in the film who listens to him anyway. He shows up wearing a helmet big enough for ten heads. Not exactly original and mainly serves as a showcase for special effects that render the film worthwhile. Well directed by William Cameron Menzies but painfully corny at times. It taps into one's imagination when it comes to our expectations to the unknown. Raymond Massey does well as this ominous figure whom transcends much turmoil and observes mankind's faults. The only interesting supporting role is Ralph Richardson as a warlord advocating destruction and the manufacturing of biplanes. As the ending indicates, this sort of ruling often goes down with the planes. Many of the performances are either flat or over the top. Among them are Edward Chapman and Cedric Hardwicke. The film was an attempt to push special effects further to greater things to come. Score: 6 / 10

wes-connors The British celebrate Christmas 1940 in London-like "Everytown" amid signs of wars and rumours of wars. Alas, the sights and sounds of "WAR!" overtake the merriment. Visionary businessman Raymond Massey (as John Cabal) is miffed. "If we don't end war, war will end us," he asserts. Decades of war follow. By 1966, "Everytown" is in ruins. A new Plague called "The Wandering Sickness" takes its toll on the population. Battling the new Dark Ages are Mr. Massey and handsome ally Maurice Braddell (as Edward Harding), a doctor. Unfortunately, brutal and boisterous Ralph Richardson (as Rudolf) rises to power. He likes to be called "Boss" and "Chief". After chewing acres of scenery, Mr. Richardson expires...Civilization gets another chance as we continue into the future, ending up in 2036 with Massey appearing as his young great-grandson. Other than the amusing clothing, these later, futuristic scenes are quite remarkable. William Cameron Menzies knows how to show spectacular set design, but the director hasn't a decent adaptation of writer H.G. Wells' book and the performances are consequently uninteresting. Wells gets no credit for predicting Paul McCartney's 1970s "Wings Over the World" concert program, but it's foreshadowed in the name of Massey's group. More obviously, "Things to Come" included a new World War and an attempt to land a man on Earth's Moon. War is always an easy and safe prediction.****** Things to Come (2/20/36) William Cameron Menzies ~ Raymond Massey, Edward Chapman, Ralph Richardson, Maurice Braddell