Things to Come

Recently rediscovered sci-fi smut from Texas, THINGS TO COME is surprisingly and laudably ambitious - particularly in its first third, where it really feels like a real movie. I was impressed by the locations the production managed to source, as well as the script, which felt fairly fleshed out and ambitious (if owing a large debt to FAHRENHEIT 451 and similar dystopian sci-fi). Unfortunately, it's a lack of direction that sinks this endeavor.

In some unidentified future, society has evolved into a socialist state where people's employment is managed by the government and everyone spends all their free time watching pornographic television. Our protagonist is a young woman who seems to have it all: a fulfilling career, a husband, and a big-screen TV in the living room. Nevertheless, like a distaff Guy Montag, she feels discontented, tired of her husband's single-minded obsession with television and longing simply to take a walk outside. As rumors of her dissatisfaction start to spread, she's recruited to join a group of revolutionaries plotting to overthrow the government, and after winning a free trip to the national Pleasure Dome, she and the group realize it might be the perfect opportunity to destroy the giant supercomputer governing society, which is conveniently located in the same complex.

All this setup is fantastic, creating an interesting (if derivative) dimestore sci-fi reality that's easy to get lost in. Unfortunately, the film totally runs out of steam once it reaches the Pleasure Dome. Our heroine wanders around not doing much, as robot pleasure guides (a la WESTWORLD) give her tours and try to help her find some way to enjoy herself. When the film suddenly bungles into its climax, an abrupt WIZARD OF OZ-style twist that crops up out of nowhere, it doesn't resolve any of the questions broached at the outset, and proves unfortunately quite unsatisfying.

What I did admire was the film's ambitious production design. There are some great locations selected that look suitably futuristic, complimented by wonderful (if chintzy) TV-style sci-fi interiors. The costuming has a similar LOST IN SPACE / early STAR TREK vibe I appreciated, and overall it seems like a lot of work went into this regional production. It's a shame the script couldn't have gone through a few more rewrites, as there are the raw materials of a real winner here.

This is basically softcore porn. Really bad acting, really awful writing and those costumes-when people aren't naked they wear this really bad uniform that looks like something a 1940's writer would imagine of mid 21st century clothing. There is a tremendous amount of nudity and sex in the movie, but it is people being watched on TV by hopelessly sexually addicted men that are into mild BDSM. This is supposed to be the future, but the writers do a very poor job of capturing that. For one thing, there is a tremendous abundance (and I mean, lots and lots) of pubic hair (on women) and that is not reflective of present day (2025) women in their 20's. Another thing, the TV's that these sexually addicted men watch look like mid 1960's consoles-there was absolutely no forethought on that. There is a one bedroom apartment seen in the movie that looks like a "futuristic" apartment constructed in 1960. This is obviously a low budget movie. If you're into softcore porn, this is your movie, otherwise, don't bother.

Agreeing substantially with the first (and only) IMDb review of this softcore porn rediscovery posted a year ago, I found this odd indie feature intriguing for a few reels, even prophetic, but it soon devolved into painfully amateurish, even embarrassing filmmaking.

Back in my movie buff life in the '70s, I saw many unsung classics, the sort of movies latterly promoted by Tarantino and others, as well as seeing "unreleasable" films (at midnight and after-hours screenings at theaters like NYC's legendary Thalia). What latter had in common was an unfinished or at least half-baked aspect more likely to elicit head-scratching "Wha?" or groaning reactions.

I was a big, big fan of George Lucas"s "THX 1138" back in 1971, having already enjoyed his short "THX 1138 4EB" at a Cinema 16 midnight program years before. "Things to Come" is in the same vein, even copying for one late scene the white-out backdrop, but instead of introducing a major talent it is becomes almost campy -that is, silly in the extreme while pretending to be serious.

This dystopia is very similar to "Westworld", more the recent TV series than the original Crichton movie the filmmakers were clearly ripping off. Even the themes, criticizing in a still-timely (witness the growing crisis of mass-murder events and lingering power of America's gun fetish culture) way the embracing of sex and particularly violence as entertainment, plus the lack of empathy for human life. Latter theme, though way too heavy-handed here, is like "Westworld" showing how fear of "the other" can insulate us from sympathy, in this case the notion that killing androids (machines) is fine and dandy since they aren't human. Sounds like a serial killer's type of philosophy.

Filmmakers also throw in some fashionable (and durable) mocking of feminism and a very cornball criticism of escapist TV. But fatally condemning this movie to obscurity, less obscure thanks to finding a print and foisting it on a cultish video public 40 years after, is the consistently desultory softcore sex scenes, anti-arousing as the deprogramming of Malcolm McDowell in "A Clockwork Orange" (minus the toothpicks to keep one'e eyes open). A plethora of unattractive women, mostly nude and sporting bushes that look suspiciously like merkins from the prop department, is really reprehensible in a sex movie. Drive-in cinemas where I lived (in Ohio) were constantly showing far better German import "Schoolgirls Report" movies at the time, not junk like "Things to Come".

And the depiction of BDSM, with bondage and whipping recurring as the subject matter of sex, is ridiculous, more in keeping with S&M movies from a decade earlier.